dataset_id
int64 0
5.47k
| email_body
stringlengths 800
9.73k
|
|---|---|
3,400 |
Subject: Revised Gas Accord II Mtg Schedule
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8191.
=====================================
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT DOCUMENT
PER CPUC RULE 51
ALL PARTIES:
Based on feedback from a number of parties, we have decided to postpone next
week's Gas Accord II Workshop. The Workshops previously scheduled for
January 10-11, 2001, and January 24-25, 2001, will not be held.
We tentatively plan on holding the next Workshops on February 7-8, and
February 21-22, 2001. We request that you pencil in these dates on your
calendars. We will confirm these dates later, hopefully by next week, once
we learn the procedural schedule for the ongoing Rate Stabilization hearings
before the CPUC.
The Gas Accord II Workshop on February 7-8 (tentative dates) will be
informational in nature, and will focus on reviewing and explaining PG&E's
comprehensive Gas Accord II Settlement Proposal, which was distributed by
e-mail on December 21, 2000. We then propose to use the following Workshop,
scheduled for February 21-22 (tentative dates), to receive specific feedback
from parties, and engage in detailed, substantive discussions.
Attached below is a revised schedule for suggested workshop dates and
timing, beginning with the tentative February 7-8 Informational Workshop.
We continue to believe that PG&E must be in a position file an application
with the Commission - either a settlement or PG&E's litigation case - no
later than the middle of this calendar year. The mid-year filing date is
necessary in order to allow sufficient time for the Commission to consider
the issues and render a decision, and for PG&E to implement the decision by
December 31, 2002, which is the date the current Gas Accord, OFO and Gas OII
settlements effectively end.
Between now and the upcoming February Workshops, we encourage Parties to
continue to review the December 21 Settlement Proposal, and to contact us
with any questions and concerns. PG&E representatives also will be
available to meet with Parties individually, or in small groups, to go over
the Settlement Proposal in detail, prior to the February Workshops. The
purpose of such smaller sessions will not be to negotiate any details, but
only to explain the PG&E Settlement Proposal, and respond to questions.
Please feel free to contact either of us, and we can make the necessary
arrangements for such a meeting.
We appreciate all the input various parties have provided regarding the
scheduling issues, and we hope this revised schedule is responsive to your
concerns.
Frank Lindh Ray Williams
415-973-2776 415-973-3634
[email protected] [email protected]
<<Gas Accord II Settlement Schedule.doc>>
- Gas Accord II Settlement Schedule.doc
=====================================
|
3,401 |
Subject: California Update--07.20.01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/12081.
=====================================
Having failed to resolve either the budget or the energy issues, the
Legislature is likely to postpone its recess and work through the weekend, at
a minimum.
In sum, though many claim that the Legislature will "vote for something," it
still doesn't appear that the "something" will include a measure that will
keep Edison out of bankruptcy.
The Senate and Assembly remain extremely far apart in their approaches to
amending the Governor's original MOU (which is dead).
The ranks of politicians that view bankruptcy as the best alternative is
growing.
In the Senate:
SB18XX---Bill to de-link the bonds from the DWR Contracts
In the only bipartisan move to date, SB18XX passed out of two committees
yesterday, but has not yet been voted on by the full Senate.
The bill de-links payment of the bonds needed to backfill the state budget
from payment of DWR contracts.
The bill is being driven by increasing concerns over the volume and price of
the DWR contracts.
The DWR contracts are being held up as the reason California must suspend, or
end, Direct Access.
Republicans on the Assembly side are supportive of 18, but Hertzberg--the
Speaker--has joined with the Governor's people in the view that the bill
would impair the contracts, consititute a breach, and expose the State to
substantial damages.
As a result, when the bill passes the Senate and gets over to the Assembly,
its chances of passage there are low.
SB72XX---The Senate's MOU
The Senate's version of the MOU--SB72XX--limped out of its final committee
yesterday before going to a vote by the full Senate, but its chances of
passing the full Senate at this point are 50-50.
The problem is that many democrats believe they will be attacked for voting
for a bill that will likely drive Edison into bankruptcy, while many other
democrats fear it will look like they bailed out Edison----the courage and
leadership is awesome.
In the Assembly:
The Assembly two versions of the MOU---AB 82XX and AB 83 XX (now AB 50XX)
The Assembly is severely divided over how to address the energy issue.
The Speaker is having a very difficult time getting democrats to support his
own bill (82XX).
Many moderate democrats support a bipartisan bill developed by a democrat
(Rod Wright), who has broken ranks with Repbublicans, and Assembly
Republicans.
In the end, the Speaker's bill is likely to prevail.
Things are complicated by the fact that the Assembly is having a very
difficult time getting a budget passed.
As noted above, the Assembly democractic leadership opposes SB 18XX and is
trying to cobble together an alternative to 18.
=====================================
|
3,402 |
Subject: Re: SDG&E Credits
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/658.
=====================================
---------------------- Forwarded by Marianne Castano/HOU/EES on 09/27/2000
09:02 AM ---------------------------
Enron Energy Services
From: Marianne Castano 09/27/2000 09:00 AM
To: Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: SDG&E Credits
Jeff & Mona: We have confirmed that our contracts are silent on the issue.
Question remains as to what the language of the original decision was...Can
you suggest someone who can dig into this for us? Should I just phone Mike
Day? Let me know...MLC
From: Jeff Dasovich on 09/22/2000 10:22 AM
To: Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Richard
Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Marianne Castano/HOU/EES@EES, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: SDG&E Credits
Likely needs to be a legal analysis based on the language of the original
decision etablishing the credits. But seems to me that we have a deal with
our customers to receive service according to price, terms and conditions
stated in our contracts with those customers, and that the contract language
would govern how the credit is treated. If the contracts don't speak to the
issue of credits, seems that our contract agrees to provide rez customers
with service for a a certain price, and as such, it would be up to us whether
we flow it through. But a lawyer, I am not. Are our contracts silent on the
issue?
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 09/22/2000 10:16 AM -----
Marianne Castano
09/22/2000 08:41 AM
To: Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: SDG&E Credits
Can either of you help me out with this question? MLC
---------------------- Forwarded by Marianne Castano/HOU/EES on 09/22/2000
08:41 AM ---------------------------
Enron Energy Services
From: Karen A Cordova 09/21/2000 05:00 PM
Phone No: 713.853.3150
713.646.8860 - FAX No.
To: Marianne Castano/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: SDG&E Credits
Diane Huddelston called Lori Pinder about an issue; Here it is:
Due to the merger btw SDG&G & Sempra Energy (about a year or less ago), a
savings was realized. The CPUC said these savings must be passed on to
customers 1 time per year, in September. They are called Annual Merger
Credits.
Pursuant to all commercial contracts, Enron is entitled to keep the savings
(per Diane). What about the residential customer accounts?
Enron keeps the savings or should the residential customer receive?
Who could handle this issue for Diane?
Thanks, KC
=====================================
|
3,403 |
Subject: Re: public relations with Helix?
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10319.
=====================================
SD only is fine. I think we need to get in DeeDee Alpert's hands (Sen SD).
Can you please get with Jeff Dasovich on how we do that?
---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Letke/DUB/EES on 03/22/2001 11:53 AM
---------------------------
Peggy Mahoney
03/22/2001 11:32 AM
To: Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES
cc: Max Eberts/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: public relations with Helix?
ok, but lets just release in San Diego. If your strategy is the legislature,
as well as future sales,
lets also say we are announcing our 100th agreement this year or something
like that. Peggy
Max - can we see a draft by Fri at 12:00pm?
Eric - what number customer are they?
Thanks
Peggy
Eric Letke
03/22/2001 08:47 AM
To: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Re: public relations with Helix?
I would like this to be visable (i.e., something we can point to with the
legislature). I see your point but more than likely, if we ever source some
customer's from SDG&E, it will be a select group. I firmly believe if we
ever made a decision to source all of the customer's from SDG&E, it would be
because we have choosen to leave CA.
I am willing to take a chance with this one. Your thoughts?
---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Letke/DUB/EES on 03/22/2001 08:44 AM
---------------------------
Peggy Mahoney
03/21/2001 07:29 PM
To: Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES
cc: Max Eberts/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: public relations with Helix?
As much as I want to do this, I am concerned about making a public statement
in light of
potential future changes. How about a customer testimonial that sales could
use?
Peggy
---------------------- Forwarded by Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES on 03/21/2001 07:27
PM ---------------------------
Lyle White
03/19/2001 09:57 AM
To: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Re: public relations with Helix?
We have a fixed price contract for 6 years and 8 months with Helix Water
District.
The fixed price contract avoids California price volatility and insures
budget certainty for Helix. Helix strongly believes in direct access.
The contract is for 12 million kilowatt hours per year.
I will have total annual dollar and total contract value this Thursday.
There is a new facility being added this summer that will expand the totals.
Helix serves the San Diego suburbs of La Mesa, El Cajon, and Spring Valley.
They are going to announce our agreement at their board meeting this
Wednesday, March 21st.
After that announcement, the are willing to proactively participate in a
press release expounding the benefits of our arrangement.
Lyle White
602-795-5786
=====================================
|
3,404 |
Subject: Re: Project Boomerang
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Paul Kaufman@ECT', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/473.
=====================================
Jeff, thanks for the response. Consider yourself a member of Project
Boomerang. I suggest that we try to talk sometime Monday and I can fill in
some of the detail on this effort. I did hear that the lawsuit was filed
under Section 5 of AB1890. Does that make any sense to you ? I will call
you Monday morning to discuss the project and the role that you can play to
help the effort.
Thanks
Frank
Jeff Dasovich@EES on 04/14/2000 04:36:35 PM
To: Frank W Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Paul Kaufman@ECT
Subject: Re: Project Boomerang
Frank:
Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. We're finalizing a deal to (among
other things) have Socalgas unbundle its in-state transport, storage and
balancing, sell off the transport and storage rights in an open season and
create a secondary market for each. They will also permit trading of
imbalances on their system. The deal's getting finalized today. (Paul,
your pal Joe Karp has joined the deal.)
The deal is currently scheduled to take effect beginning April 1, 2000.
Stephanie Miller's been kept in the loop. May be something that folks might
want include in due diligence w.r.t. to any gas contracts tied to the QFs.
Your questions:
1. I am aware that the PUC just filed suit at FERC against El Paso for
selling about 1.2 Bcf/day of gas capacity into California to Merchant Energy,
but hadn't heard about a suit regarding the QFs. I will find out and let you
know.
2. Yes, I am in a position to follow the debate and keep you informed. I'm
assuming that your are up to speed on the debate as of today. If not, let me
know and I and/or Paul can fill you in.
If there's anything else, don't hesitate to holler. (415.782.7822). Good
weekend to you both.
Best,
Jeff
Frank W Vickers@ECT
04/14/2000 03:20 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Paul Kaufman
Subject: Project Boomerang
Jeff, as you may know we are conducting due diligence on 11 california QF's
that El Paso Merchant Energy purchased from Dynegy on Feb 1 of this year. we
are considering the purchase of 50% of El Paso's interest. In discussions
with Paul he suggested that I get you involved with the transaction. Two
things come to immediate attention.
I heard that the PUC has filed suit against El Paso relative to these 11
assets. What do you know about this ?
NOw that the CPUC is trying to implement terms of AB 1890's section 390 alot
of questions and methods are surfacing about calculations of payments to
QF's. Are you in a postion to follow this debate and keep me informed during
the process ??
Thanks
Frank
503-464-3940
=====================================
|
3,405 |
Subject: SB 1x passes the Senate
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3565.
=====================================
SB 1x passed the State Senate late this afternoon by a vote of 25-12.
Senator Soto spoke in support arguing that the money should be returned to
taxpayers.? The flate rate of the refundable tax credit will be determined
by the FTB.? Senator Scott said that FERC has failed to act.? This bill will
regulate the price of electricity in CA.? He said that the PUC will be
allowed to review and adjust the base price for the tax, and that the PUC
could allow additional exemptions (is this an unconstitutional delegation of
authority?).? Also, a long-term contract arrangements are exempt from the
bill.
Senator Morrow spoke in opposition.? He said that the bill is not about
relief.? Rather, it redistributes wealth and should be changed to refund the
money to consumers.
Senator Battin spoke in opposition.? He cited the planned Intergent plant in
North Palm Springs.? THis bill does not solve the crisis.? It just
discourages generators from building in this state.
Senator Dunn said that emergency steps must be taken and that he supports
this bill.? Otherwise, CA's wealth will go out of the state, primarily to
Texas.
Senator Polanco spoke in support and said that ratepayers are being gouged.?
Billions in profits have been reaped by generators.
Senator McClintock spoke in opposition and said that power plants are not
being built here and that this bill will stop the construction of plants in
CA.
Senator Peace spoke in support and said that FERC has failed to enforce the
law.
Senator Perata spoke in support and said that generators have gotten caught
red-handed and now need to pay a penalty.
Senator Haynes spoke in opposition and said that the constitution will be
violated by this bill and that companies will sell to other states, rather
than California.
Senator Bowen spoke in support of the bill.? She asked why we should have
the welcome mat our to CA when these companies are charging 300% more in
their prices then just a year or two ago.? She also indicated that the
Legislative Counsel has given them an opinion that this bill is
constitutional because it only applies to the electrons flowing into the
state.? Whatever that means?
No Republicans voted for the bill.? No Democrats voted against it.? FInal
vote was 25-12.
However, if the Assembly or Senate adjourns the Special Session without
passing this bill and/or AB 128x, then both measures will die.
Chris Micheli, Esq.
Carpenter Snodgrass & Associates
1201 K Street, Suite 710
Sacramento, CA? 95814
(916) 447-2251
FAX: (916) 445-5624
EMAIL: [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,406 |
Subject: FW: SDG&E RATES - WOOD ACR in A.00-10-045/A.01-01-044
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3762.
=====================================
Attached is an Assigned Commissioner's Ruling pertaining to the
implementation of AB X1 43 and to SDG&E's previously filed application for a
Revenue Shortfall Surcharge.
Specifically, the provisions of AB X1 43 provide for freezing the energy
component of large commercial and industrial customers in SDG&E's service
territory at 6.5 cent/kWh (retroactive to February 7, 2001). The
Commission, through a decision to be issued this Thursday (May 3rd), will
implement this frozen rate. The bill, however, also provides the Commission
with the authority to consider the comparable energy components of rates for
comparable customer classes served by PG&E and SCE, and, if it determine it
to be in the public interest, to adjust the frozen SDG&E rate (retroactive
to Feb.7). The ACR issued yesterday establishes procedures for the
Commission to determine if such an adjustment is appropriate. As part of
the proceeding the Commission will also consider whether the current
voluntary bill stabilization program for large customers should be
eliminated and whether the definition of small commercial customer should be
revised.
For this phase of the proceeding (the Large Customer Phase) the Commission
has set a very expedited schedule. Prepared Testimony is due May 11 and
hearings would be in San Diego on May 22 and 23, with a Commission decision
issued on June 28 (the complete schedule is appended to the ACR).
The ACR also addresses the small customer side of the equation. The ruling
determines that the Commission is precluded from acting to adjust the
current 6.5 cent ceiling on the energy component of residential and small
commercial rates until it completes the statutorily mandated prudence review
of SDG&E's purchasing practices. However, it sets forth a schedule which
will run parallel to that currently ongoing review. The scope of that phase
of the proceeding will include whether their should be an adjustment to the
ceiling; whether the ceiling should be made into a frozen rate; whether a
surcharge should be implemented to recover the revenue shortfall;
appropriate amortization, etc. This phase moves on a slower track with a
commission decision to be issued at the beginning of November.
Of primary importance at this juncture is whether Enron wants/plans to
participate in the phase of the proceedings for the large customers in
SDG&E's territory, and, if so, the extent of that participation.
Jeanne Bennett
Subject: SDG&E RATES - WOOD ACR in A.00-10-045/A.01-01-044
Assigned Commissioner Wood issued the attached ruling today.
<<22F901!.DOC>>
- 22F901!.DOC
=====================================
|
3,407 |
Subject: Upcoming Training Events - Applied Corporate Finance (1 1/2 days)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2627.
=====================================
fyi
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/Enron Communications on 06/07/01 10:13 AM=
=20
-----
=09EBS Education Center
=09Sent by: EBS Announcements
=0906/06/01 02:21 PM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: All EBS Houston, EBS Employees - Portland
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: Upcoming Training Events - Applied Corporate Finance (1 1/=
2 days)=20
- June 12-13, 2001 (Houston - Shepherd) & EBS Luncheon Discussion Series -=
=20
June 19, 2001 (Houston - EB5C2)
To: All EBS Employees
From: EBS Education Center
Subject: Upcoming Training Events - Applied Corporate Finance (1 1/2 days)=
-=20
June 12-13, 2001 (Houston - Shepherd) &=20
EBS Luncheon Discussion Series - June 19, 2001 (Houston - EB5C2)
June 12-13, 2001
Applied Corporate Finance--1 1/2 Days =20
TO REGISTER, CLICK ON THE LINK >> =20
Participants will develop an understanding of deal components and how value=
=20
is extracted from the deal structure. Dimensions of deal structures are=20
explored in detail including off balance sheet financing, how to account fo=
r=20
revenue from deals, economic justification of projects and the unique=20
challenges of international deals. In addition, the participants learn abou=
t=20
risk assessment and quantification as well as credit issues and how they ar=
e=20
managed. Financial leverage is discussed; both the upside potential and the=
=20
downside risks. Mastery of the seminar material is achieved through the=20
application of the financial principals presented in the course to a number=
=20
of relevant, industry-specific case studies. Teams analyze the case materia=
l=20
using analytical tools presented in the seminar, and team members experienc=
e=20
the dynamics of team work - its frustration and rewards. The course conclud=
es=20
with a team assignment to analyze a deal and recommend an appropriate=20
structure, complete a discounted cash flow analysis, identify the deal=01,s=
=20
inherent risks and recommend options for managing the risks. Teams report o=
ut=20
to the rest of the participants and managers who are currently working on t=
he=20
deal analyzed. These managers answer questions and interact with the teams=
=20
during the case presentations.
Dates: June 12-13, 2001 - Houston (Shepherd)
Time: 8:30 am - 5:00 pm - day one
8:30 am - 12:00 pm - day two
Cost: $600.00 (charged to your cost center)
Cancellation Policy: Cancellations must be received 48 hours prior to class=
=20
date to avoid being charged.
=20
June 19, 2001
EBS Luncheon Discussion Series
EB5C2
11:30 am - 1:00 pm
For additional information, call:
Rita Ramirez
EBS Training Specialist
(713) 853-4711
=====================================
|
3,408 |
Subject: CA Energy Issues
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1800.
=====================================
Judge says Enron has to give up documents
By Emily Bazar
Bee Capitol Bureau
(Published Sept. 7, 2001)
Enron Corp. must turn over sensitive internal documents to state legislators, a Sacramento judge ruled Thursday, but only after the two sides agree to a court-approved confidentiality agreement.
For months, a special Senate committee investigating electricity price manipulation has been issuing subpoenas and gathering documents from power generators and marketers.
During the process, the committee has found three companies in contempt for resisting the subpoenas, including Enron, which fought back with a lawsuit asking the court to intervene on its behalf.
In his ruling stemming from the suit, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Charles Kobayashi said he wasn't convinced that "the Senate committee will be able to maintain the petitioner's right to confidentiality." As a result, he ruled, those documents handed over by Enron that contain legitimate trade secrets must be protected by a confidentiality agreement.
In his ruling on another Enron motion, however, he denied the company's request to quash the committee's subpoena.
Still, Enron officials considered the judge's findings on the whole a victory.
"We had no certainty that anything we handed over to the Senate would remain confidential," said Enron spokeswoman Karen Denne. "We were not receiving due process from Senator (Joe) Dunn's committee. They were acting as judge and jury on this issue."
Dunn, D-Santa Ana, who is the committee chairman, said he "respectfully disagrees" with the judge's decision on the confidentiality agreement, which he said will be reviewed in the next few days by the Legislature's lawyers to determine whether an appeal should be pursued.
Another Enron motion seeking an injunction against the committee will be heard in court next week.
Enron is one of three companies that have been found in contempt by the committee.
However, the committee purged its contempt finding against Mirant in July after the company complied with the committee's requests.
The committee was poised to expunge its contempt finding against Reliant Energy Inc. on Thursday as well but couldn't draw enough senators for a vote. Dunn delayed the action until the next meeting.
As for the contempt charge facing Enron, the Senate Rules Committee is scheduled to review the findings Monday and possibly make a recommendation to the full Senate.
Should the full Senate also find Enron in contempt, it would determine what punishments, if any, would be levied. Dunn said he believes fines would be the most appropriate punishment.
=====================================
|
3,409 |
Subject: Important eProcurement Information
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28209.
=====================================
eProcurement
You have been identified as a future user of eProcurement. eProcurement is=
=20
coming to Corporate on Monday, July 2nd!=20
Keep this information to help you transition to the new eProcurement system=
.
When should I use eProcurement?
Use eProcurement to buy:
* Office Supplies: toner cartridges, printer paper, tablets, pens, and mo=
re!
* IT Hardware: new hire workstations, monitors, printers, keyboards,=20
etc. =20
How does eProcurement work?
* Go to <http://ibuyit.enron.com> and logon to eProcurement.
* Use the catalog or a template to fill the shopping cart and order the=20
items.
* The request will be processed and fulfilled. It=01,s that easy!
If the shopping cart requires additional approval:
* The shopping cart will automatically be routed for approval based on the=
=20
requestor=01,s reporting structure and the monetary approval limits of thei=
r=20
business unit.
* The approver will receive e-mail notification that there is a shopping=
=20
cart that requires their approval. =20
* Upon rejection, the requestor will receive e-mail notification that thei=
r=20
shopping cart was rejected.
* Upon approval, the shopping cart will be processed and your order=20
fulfilled. =20
* The approver will log onto eProcurement and accept or reject the shoppin=
g=20
cart.
* Note: if the shopping cart exceeds your spend limit or contains IT=20
hardware items it will require additional approval/review.
How do I get security to access eProcurement?
Receipt of this e-mail indicates that you have been identified as an=20
eProcurement Requestor or Approver, and that you will have access to the=20
system beginning July 2nd. Other users should contact ISC Customer Care to=
=20
request security to access the system. =20
How can I receive eProcurement training?
* Visit the ISC Education Center to sign-up for system demonstrations and/=
or=20
hands-on classroom training, and to access on-line training: <
http://iscedcenter.enron.com>
* Visit the ISC Document library for Quick Reference Cards and other helpf=
ul=20
training materials: <http://isc.enron.com/site/doclibrary/user/default.asp>=
=20
Go live packets coming soon!
An eProcurement Go Live packet will be sent to all recipients of this=20
e-mail. Packets will include laminated Quick Reference Cards, spend/approv=
al=20
limits, and other helpful information. If you do not receive a packet by=
=20
July 13th, please contact iBuyit.
Who do I call for help?
Call ISC Customer Care at (713) 345-4727.
Questions?
For general information about iBuyit, send an e-mail to <
mailto:[email protected]>.
=====================================
|
3,410 |
Subject: FW: Rehearing on PG&E's GRC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/700.
=====================================
Changes to the Distribution Revenue Requirement
-----Original Message-----
From: JBennett [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:33 AM
To: Jeff Dasovich (E-mail); Sue Mara (E-mail)
Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
Subject: Rehearing on PG&E's GRC
Almost two years after issuing a decision in PG&E's GRC, the Commission
issued it rehearing order on October 16th and, lo and behold, actually
granted TURN's rehearing request in part. The overall result is to reduce
the capital revenue requirement by $24.8 million and expenses by $37.3
million. In addition, some portion of PG&E' estimated $171 million in
electric distribution capital spending will be subject to rehearing.
Listed below are the areas in which the Commission granted rehearing.
1. Electric Distribution Capital Spending. The Commission will, in
essence, reopen the record, and allow PG&E to put into evidence how much it
invested in its electric distribution plant in 1998. PG&E had used a 1998
forecasted amt of capital expenditures to develop its test year forecast.
TURN argued that there was substantial evidence on the record that this
amount was never spent. PG&E argued that the record closed prior to the end
of 1998 so the best it could do was an estimate. On rehearing, the
Commission agreed with TURN, that there was evidence that the forecasted
amount was never spent, so they are allowing PG&E to prove it. The
rehearing order states that any rates that are raised based on the electric
distribution capital forecast adopted the GRC decision may be subject to
refund.
2. Emergency Response Work This work category under electric distribution
capital spending was reduced by $17.2 million.
3. Vegetation Management. The Supplemental Tree Trimming Program was
reduced by $9.2 million.
4. Meter Reading. PG&E had primarily used accounting changes to justify
the large increase in this service. On rehearing the Commission stated that
PG&E had failed to substantiate those changes and reduced the allowed amount
by $7.9 million.
5. Account Services. On rehearing the commission stated that PG&E had
failed to show (a) why it cost so much more to provide services to CIA
customers than residential customers ( $43.30 vs. $10.20); and (b) that
money was not going for marketing activities that the Commission had
disallowed in the previous GRC. The result was that the commission
disallowed $20 million.
6. Customer Information Systems. The Commission disallowed $7.2 million as
funds which ratepayers had already expended for CIS rewrites for which they
had not received any benefits.
=====================================
|
3,411 |
Subject: Fwd: Court Injunction Suspended in Enron Case Involving CA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12170.
=====================================
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 15:26:40 -0500
From: "Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]>
To: "Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>, "Randall Rich"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Court Injunction Suspended in Enron Case Involving CA Universities
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Court Won't Order Enron to Supply Uc Energy / Cal State's Electric Supply for
Summer Also Could Become Critical
( May 08, 2001 )
A federal appeals court has granted Enron a reprieve from an order requiring
the Houston-based energy giant to restore direct electric service to
California's public universities, leaving them subject to uncertain utility
supplies this summer.
The University of California and California State University systems won an
injunction April 11 from U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton, who said Enron
appeared to have broken its contract to supply both university systems with
power through next March.
But in an order made public yesterday, a three-judge U.S. Court of Appeals
panel suspended the injunction until the court rules on its legality,
possibly by late July or early August.
In the meantime, most campuses will continue to get electricity from Pacific
Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison Co., whose customers are
expected to face rolling blackouts for much of the summer.
UC spokesman Chuck McFadden said university hospitals and some other
facilities were exempt from blackouts, but classrooms and administrative
offices could go dark when supplies dropped.
Enron spokeswoman Peggy Mahoney said the company was pleased with the ruling.
"This does not change our continued commitment to honor all the financial and
other terms of the agreement," she said.
Enron signed four-year contracts with the universities in 1998 to supply
power for 5 percent less than the state's price cap. The company dropped
direct service abruptly to the universities Feb. 1, forcing them to rely on
power supplies from PG&E and Southern California Edison.
Enron promised to keep its pledge of low rates through next March. But the
universities said a return to utility service would hurt their conservation
efforts, and the loss of direct supplies would threaten blackouts.
The appellate panel did not decide whether Enron had violated its contract,
but said the company, if it was wrong, could reimburse the universities for
any losses they suffered.
The court also said Enron faced substantial losses if it had to restore
direct service and ultimately won the contract dispute.
=====================================
|
3,412 |
Subject: RE: Mendocino
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/27997.
=====================================
Hi group,
I emailed Lari (who confirmed that we are on the reservation list, without
credit card numbers or deposit because she knows us ...) that we think we'll
have five for an all-day ride on Sat. (Pat, me, Cal, Pippa and Madeleine)
and six for a half day on Sunday (same plus Nora). Jeff may join us. Lari
is aware the actual number may be slightly more or less, but obviously if
you decide not to go, the earlier she knows, the easier for her. We start
at 9:30 a.m. on Sat, and 10:00 a.m. on Sun.
Jeff, we hope you can make it. If anyone else wants to join also, please
let me know.
Re hotel, right now there is moderate availability in Mendocino/Fort Bragg
for that weekend in Sept. (nights of 21-22), but most of the hotels up there
charge a cancellation fee of anywhere from 3% to $20.00, no matter how early
one cancels. So it probably does not make sense to reserve rooms at several
places thinking we will decide later.
Please give your vote, which of these would you be interested in (or if you
have another suggestion, please feel free to offer it -- I'm overwhelmed
with the many other choices and have no personal experience with any to rely
on):
Cleone Gardens, recommended by Lari, literally across the street from the
ranch on the north end of Fort Bragg, with a number of rooms in the $85-$100
range, also some multi-bed rooms for a little more; it looks nice and
comfortable on the website though not really "fancy" (there are links from
Lari's site, www.horse-vacations.com). Breakfast can be ordered. Because
of proximity to ranch and town, this is my preference.
Howard Creek Ranch Inn (Madeleine's preference), in Westport, north of Fort
Bragg. Very quaint renovated farmhouse B&B, Martha Stewart type garden,
private rooms are around $105, and some two-bed rooms are between $105 and
$160 if we don't mind sharing rooms/living room sleepers. The upside is
the charm and ambience, the downside is the remote location and the distance
from Fort Bragg (30 minutes fast driving) and that we may therefore miss
breakfast both days. They serve it at 9:00 a.m., and with the minimum
30-minute drive to the ranch, that makes getting to both breakfast and
riding on time unrealistic. And, as we all know, rides may start late, but
they always end on time, so its important to be prompt to get our full
riding time! I asked if the B&B is willing to do breakfast at another time
and they said no (they start cooking before 7:00 a.m. even to meet the 9:00
deadline, so I'm not sure how much earlier they could really do it).
(www.howardcreekranch.com)
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
Amy
=====================================
|
3,413 |
Subject: Smutny Letter to Senator Dunn
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12371.
=====================================
June 22, 2001
The Honorable Joseph Dunn
Chair, Senate Select Committee
California State Senate
Room 2080
California State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Senator Dunn:
Earlier this year, you met individually with IEP and various other parties to
explain the purpose of the Senate Select Committee?s hearing and the process
under which they were to be conducted. ?You made it very clear that you were
planning to have fact-finding hearings based upon fundamental fairness and
due process. ?You made a further commitment that there would be no surprises.
?Prior to today, the hearings have been conducted consistent with that
representation.
Unfortunately, today it appears that the Committee has set a new course that
radically departs from these previous commitments. ?Today, the Committee is
hearing testimony from several surprise witnesses. ?These witnesses are
former employees of San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) under contract with
Duke Energy for an interim period during which Duke Energy operated the
facilities in San Diego. ??It is our understanding that these former contract
employees are alleging that the company failed to properly maintain these
facilities, and they are alleging that Duke Energy cycled these facilities
differently than the former owner, SDG&E. ?It is also our understanding that
Duke Energy will not be afforded the opportunity to contemporaneously
challenge these allegations and/or provide an explanation as to the
operational behavior of the facilities. ?In short, the hearings are being
reduced to a media event, giving credence to the unsustainable allegations of
disgruntled ex-employees.
Respectfully, it would appear that the Committee has wandered far afield of
its stated goals. ?These hearings have the potential of identifying what went
wrong with California?s energy policy and how to fix it. ?However, this will
only occur if this inquiry is based on informal facts and complete
information, not innuendo and unsubstantiated allegations. ?It is the pursuit
of facts, not headlines, which will solve California?s energy crisis. ?These
facts will be revealed only in a fair process, where allegations made are
subject to contemporaneous response. ?
It is our hope that today?s process is an aberration, and not a departure
from your commitments. ?The Committee is at a crossroads. ?It can choose to
engage in fact-finding and analysis, or it can be reduced to a witch-hunt in
pursuit of headlines. ?For the benefit of all Californian?s, the Committee
should focus on fact-finding and analysis.
Sincerely,
Jan Smutny-Jones
Executive Director
=====================================
|
3,414 |
Subject: FW: Open Enrollment for Benefits
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/797.
=====================================
Good Morning Everyone.
If you would like to listen to the meeting about open enrollment today, please meet in the small conference room at 11:30 AM.
Please print out the following presentation to follow along with during the meeting. If you have any questions please ask Cristina (7819).
Here's to your health,
Cheers,
April
-----Original Message-----
From: Kearney, Julie
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 8:41 AM
To: Hrach, April
Cc: Rodriguez, Grace; Jarnagin, Josie
Subject: Open Enrollment Presentation
April,
Here's the presentation. We'll talk w/ you soon!
Julie K
x7404
-----Original Message-----
From: Kearney, Julie
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:09 AM
To: Alamo, Joseph; Brodbeck, Kelly; Browner, Victor; Calvert, Gray; Carranza, Octavio; Danielson, Michael D.; Dasovich, Jeff; Deane, Ryan; Dyer, Laird; Fillinger, Mark; Ha, Vicky; Hrach, April; Kelly, Derek; Kromer, Steve; Ly, Aandy; Mara, Susan; Mcdonald, Michael; Mentan, Ronald; O'Neal, Aida; Parquet, David; Perrino, Dave; Petrochko, Mona L.; Qureishi, Ibrahim; Russell, Dean; Schoen, Mary; Sezgen, Osman; Tully, Mark; Turnipseed, Edith; Wehn, Samuel; Wong, Michael; Zavala, Cristina
Subject: Open Enrollment for Benefits
Importance: High
Open Enrollment for your 2002 Health Benefits begins Monday, October 29, 2001!
Q. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
A. If you plan to make changes to your existing benefit coverage, you will need to make changes during Open Enrollment which begins Monday, October 29, 2001 at 8:00 AM (Central) and ends on November 12, 2001 at 5:00 PM (Central)
To facilitate these changes, you received an Open Enrollment Benefit Packet at your home address. This packet contains a personalized [Julie Kearney] worksheet and the Enron Instruction Guide to help you make your selections. (If you have not received your Info Packet, please let us know ASAP! )
Q. WHAT DO I NEED TO DO?
1. If you are satisfied with your current elections and do not need to make changes, do nothing. Your current choices will automatically roll over to 2002.
2. If you plan to make changes to your coverage, you will need to either access the Intranet website at work: benefits.enron.com
or at home at www.Enron.BenefitsNow.com or call the Phone Enrollment Line at (800) 332-7979, Option 5.
Q. I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS. I NEED MORE INFORMATION.
A. If you have more questions or need more information, you may call in to our Open Enrollment "Brown Bag" Info Session being held on Friday,October 26 @ 11:30 PM in the Mt Hood Conference Room.
EWS Portland HR Office
Julie Kearney x7404
Grace Rodriguez x8321
=====================================
|
3,415 |
Subject: Cal-ISO: underscheduling caused grid failures
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', "nicholas.o'[email protected]", '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2103.
=====================================
Cal-ISO: underscheduling caused grid failures
09/28/2000
Megawatt Daily
(c) Copyright 2000 Pasha Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Under-scheduling of load on the part of California's utilities caused
reliability problems in the state's electricity grid this summer, Ziad
Alaywan, the managing director of engineering and support at the California
Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) said. Speaking at a Cal-ISO stakeholder
meeting this week, Alaywan said Cal-ISO was forced to spend over $100 million
in out-of-market purchases this summer in order to cover unscheduled load not
purchased by the utilities in the day-ahead markets.
A confluence of factors added up to create the emergency situations the
Cal-ISO faced this summer, according to Alaywan. He cited arbitrage between
the California Power Exchange (Cal PX) and Cal-ISO markets, a reliance on
real-time (rather than day-ahead) markets and a general shortage of power
supply in California as reasons why California's power grid was stretched to
its limits this summer.
According to figures presented by Alaywan, the instance of under-scheduling
was some 50% higher this summer than in the two previous summers. This
under-scheduling resulted in a total of 36 stage 1 and 2 emergencies between
June 1 and August 15 and dictated that the ISO curtail 13,450 MW on 12
different occasions. In addition, the ISO spent $100,820,000 on out-of-market
electricity purchases during that period, up from $790,000 the previous year.
As a solution, Alaywan suggested increasing incentives to engage in forward
scheduling of power and that supply be increased. The Cal-ISO has made a
request for proposals for some 3000 MW for next summer to be used as a
peaking management tool, as well as allotting $800 million for transmission
upgrades over the next five years, Alaywan said.
Elena Schmid, Cal-ISO's vice president of strategic development and
communication, also speaking at the meeting cited insufficient generation,
inadequate transmission, under-scheduling of load, a lack of price responsive
demand, and the exercise of market power as market failures handicapping the
ISO's smooth delivery of power. To combat these shortcomings, Jeanne Sole, in
charge of long-term grid planning at the ISO, suggested that the ISO
encourage expansion of the gird and the competitive provision of electricity
for the California market. Changes must be made in the ISO and other entities
involved in power transmission and regulation over the next 18 months to
lessen the likelihood of such problems occurring in the future, the speakers
said. ADP
=====================================
|
3,416 |
Subject: Re: Environmental Strategy Meeting
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON', 'Mary', '[email protected]', 'Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON']
File: dasovich-j/sent/293.
=====================================
Thanks so much for the info. This is very useful. I will try to make the
next meeting. Hopefully the crisis out here will be over by then. How would
you structure it differently next time?
Best,
Jeff
Enron Energy Services
From: Stacey Bolton 09/15/2000 03:38 PM
Phone No: 713-853-9916
To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary
Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Environmental Strategy Meeting
The meeting went well. There was a lot of discussion regarding the current
deals involving the env. market. ENA global markets presented their strategy
on trading/marketing emissions as well as compliance outsourcing
(comprehensive services related to emissions reductions.); EES talked about
capturing bypassed emissions from current bundled deals as well as the
challenges of doing retail in states w/ varying mandates & reporting
requirements; EES (Bruce Stram) talked a bit about dg; ENA origination
talked about a massive fuel cell project they are working on (they are
keeping it confidential currently); ENA West Structuring talked about
financial packages to offset intermittent risk assc. w/ wind; Michael Payne
EWC talked about wind development in the states and the associated
opportunities w/ renewable energy credits; New Power talked a bit about their
rollout in NJ, PA and upcoming CA. New Power is at a point where they need
to get up on the curve w/ regard to renewable mandates and reporting
standards.
Everyone seemed to agree that it makes sense for environmental strategies to
act as the "link" between the groups w/ regard to env. market opportunities.
There are considerable synergies involved w/ ee, renewables, air emissions
and technology control, and as we interface across the commercial groups,
ensure that the left hand is talking to the right (i.e. the deals are
capturing the most value and groups are aware of what others are working
on.) We are rolling out an intranet page where we intend to offer business
intelligence and env. regulation info. In the near term, I'll be circulating
the presentations and the contact list. There will be some sort of follow up
meeting that is structured completely differently than this one.
Hope this is helpful. Have a good weekend.
Stacey
Jeff Dasovich
09/15/2000 11:35 AM
To: Stacey Bolton/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Re: Environmental Strategy Meeting
My apologies, but as you can imagine, California's little crisis has me a bit
preoccupied. Would love to know what comes out of the meeting, though.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,417 |
Subject: Leading Edge Sponsor Resume Drop - Wed. Sept. 12th!
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1754.
=====================================
MBAers,
In light of the tough job market and importance of getting some quality face
time with recruiters this year...
The Leading Edge Technology Conference is hosting a special INVITATION ONLY
Recruiting Reception at this year's Conference on Saturday, Sept. 22nd at
6:00pm in the Wells Fargo Room.
What Companies are Sponsoring / Accepting Resumes?
a.. JPMorgan Chase H&Q
b.. HP
c.. Accenture
d.. Broadview
e.. BEA
f.. Fortune
g.. NYSE
h.. Business 2.0
i.. Wideray
This reception is the perfect opportunity for you to network with
companies that may or may not be holding official recruiting events on
campus this year. We'll have wine, beer, appetizers and plenty of one on
one time.
HOW DO I GET INVITED?
How: PARTICIPATE IN THE RESUME DROP!
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS BELOW
a.. Submit a Resume only (no cover letter) to [email protected] NOT
TO THE CAREER CENTER (don't worry - I won't read them)
b.. Include the Company name in the Email Subject line and Your Name
(Joe_Smo.doc or pdf) as the doc. title. Send a seperate email for each
company!!
c.. First Year's - Resume in standard Haas format is preferred, but not
mandatory.
When: BY WEDNESDAY, SEPT. 12TH AT 9:00 PM!!! YES - TWO DAYS FROM NOW!
Who: Second Years or First Years - it's completely the company's option who
they choose to invite. They will invite approximately 5 people. Not all
sponsors may choose to participate, so send your resume in at your
discretion.
What: Remember, this is a networking / pre-interview opportunity. This is
not a promise by any company to give offers or follow up with an official
interview. But it is an indication that you have made the radar screen.
Some companies, like Broadview, are using this as the primary recruiting
event at Haas this fall. You need not be registered for the conference to
attend the networking reception if you are invited.
Follow Up: We will be notifing you if you are invited by Wednesday Sept.
19th.
What if I don't get Invited?: All these companies will have a general
sponsor table up all day at the conference where you are welcome to drop
your resume during the day or simply go to ask them questions. However,
this option is only open to you if you are a registered conference attendee.
Questions: While we are coordinating with the Career Center closely to put
this together for you, it is not an official career center event - so please
direct questions to either Sara Smolek or Jeff Clementz at the email
addresses below - PLEASE PLEASE - DO NOT EMAIL THE CAREER CENTER DIRECTLY!
[email protected] [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,418 |
Subject: RE: FOR FINAL REVIEW -- ENA Comments in Support of Kern River
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/27800.
=====================================
Leslie - please call me
I talked to Barry and he has some comments
Steph
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawner, Leslie
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 9:37 AM
To: Cantrell, Rebecca
Cc: Comnes, Alan; Tycholiz, Barry; Nicolay, Christi; Perrino, Dave; Black,
Don; Fulton, Donna; McMichael Jr., Ed; Smith, George F.;
[email protected]; Steffes, James; Dasovich, Jeff; Thome, Jennifer;
Shireman, Kristann; Sullivan, Patti; Kaufman, Paul; Allen, Phillip K.; Gay,
Randall L.; Alvarez, Ray; Frank, Robert; Superty, Robert; McCubbin, Sandra;
Miller, Stephanie; Walton, Steve; South, Steven P.; Mara, Susan; Calcagno,
Suzanne
Subject: Re: FOR FINAL REVIEW -- ENA Comments in Support of Kern River
I have added a reference to recent FERC decision in a Kern River case which
rejected a contract provision between Kern and Union Pacific which would have
given UP priority rights to reduce its CD. This is on page 9.
<< File: Kern5.doc >>
Rebecca W Cantrell@ECT 06/12/01 05:20 PM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Barry Tycholiz/Enron@EnronXGate, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave
Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
[email protected], James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jennifer Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie
Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Phillip K
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron,
Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Miller/Enron@EnronXGate, Steve
Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Steven P
South/Enron@EnronXGate, Randall L Gay/Enron@EnronXGate, Patti
Sullivan/Enron@EnronXGate, Kristann Shireman/HOU/EES@EES, Robert
Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Suzanne Calcagno/Enron@EnronXGate, Ed
McMichael/Enron@EnronXGate, George F Smith/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject:
FOR FINAL REVIEW -- ENA Comments in Support of Kern River
Attached for your review and comments are ENA's comments in support of Kern
River's petition for a declaratory order relating to SoCal Gas' assertion
that it has the first right to expansion capacity now being constructed in
the California Emergency Action Project to add 135,000 Mcf/d of capacity to
California that would come on-line during July.
The comments must be filed at FERC by Friday, June 15. If you have issues or
comments, please contact Leslie Lawner or me as soon as you can. Leslie is
at 505-623-6778 and my extension in Houston is 35840. If possible, e-mail us
since we will both be traveling or at an off-site meeting beginning mid-day
Wednesday.
<< File: CP01-381 KR Petition Draft 4.doc >>
=====================================
|
3,419 |
Subject: RE: Federico Boschi Bio
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/1889.
=====================================
No problem. Thanks for re-forwarding.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Guerrero, Janel
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 7:14 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: Federico Boschi Bio
You are a gem to escort Mr. Boschi to the meeting!!!
*****************************************************8
Name: Federico
Surname: Boschi
Born in Bolgna on 29 December 1963
Address: Via D'Azeglio n. 63 Bologna Italy
Zip code: 40124 Italy
Tel: +39051581275
Mobile: +393356645158
Study: Graduated in economics on 1995, Bologna University; Thesis in Industrial
Economics on: liberalization of the Italian electricity industry.
Languages: Italian mother language
English Good
Spain sufficient
Business experience (Most relevant);
July 2001 as of today
Company: Acquirente Unico ( a electricity purchasing agency
for the whiole Italian captive market)
Position: Purchase and sales manager; moreover I'm responsible
for setting up the risk management office
July 2000 up to June 2001
Institution: Autorita' per l'energia elettrice ed il gas (the
Italian energy regulator)
Position: officer in the electricity area;
Main tasks: a) stranded costs recovery mechanism; b) scarce
import capacity allocation criteria c)wholesale market rules (code of dispatching
regulation including ancillary services market - including the balancing
market - and congestion management mechanism).
March 2000 up to June 2000
Institution: Ministero dell'Industria
Position: member of the Minister's technical secretary (advising
the Minister on energy issues)
March 1997 up to June 2000
Company: AMI Imola (a water, gas, electricity and waste disposal
municipal utility);
Position: Responsible for strategic planning;
I also wrote articles on electricity regulation (tariffs, wheeling..) in
Italy.
Expectations:
As I'm responsible for setting up the trading desk and the risk management
office of Acquirente Unico (that is itself a newly constituted company)
I would like to improve my knolegde on these issues (resources and skills
needed and so on); I would like to understand what could be outsourced and
what kind of incentives it requires.
I'm so sorry, That's the best I can do as I'm still on holiday
Bye
Federico
__________________________________________________________________
Abbonati a Tiscali!
Con VoceViva puoi anche ascoltare ed inviare email al telefono.
Chiama VoceViva all' 892 800 http://voceviva.tiscali.it
=====================================
|
3,420 |
Subject: Re: Reliant Negawatt proposal
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11189.
=====================================
I may be too late, because I took a couple of days of vacation, but I will
still respond. I think with adjustments and broadening, there should be a
proposal that Enron and Reliant could both support.
1. Under Reliant's plan, the customer is selling a call option for
interruption, rather than a block of energy. This means the customer is not
planning ahead to shift production, but waiting for the call to be
exercised. This doesn't do much for forward planning and it makes it
difficult for an industry to plan ahead. Some customers who cannot live with
an interruption on call, can nevertheless move production on a planned basis
to another day, another factory, or even give up production for a period.
The best outcome is for the customer to be able to bid for either sale of a
preplanned block of energy or sale an interruptible call option. This is the
broadening of the proposal I suggest.
2. WSCC is the WRONG the absolutely WRONG place for the market to be
organized. They have no experience or infrastructure for handling market
activity. WSCC runs in terror whenever an economic issue is raised. The
utilities have way to much voting power. The list goes on. Under WSCC the
proposal will be talked to death. You need someone with infrastructure to
run a market. Why limit this to one market or marketer. The key is getting
the state tariff riders in place, then the utilities can place the orders
with whatever vendor offers the best price. If a neutral site for posting is
needed, use APX or maybe even the WSPP bulletin board. This centralization
in a single market is not helpful.
Steve
Richard Shapiro@ENRON
04/12/2001 01:30 PM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Reliant Negawatt proposal
Comments?
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 04/12/2001
01:29 PM ---------------------------
From: Tom Briggs on 04/12/2001 11:46 AM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Reliant Negawatt proposal
I have attached a proposal prepared by Reliant. Reliant hopes that it is
something that Enron can support (with any modifications). Steve Walton has
concerns about the role of the WSCC. ELCON supports the concept with some
other modifications. I recognise that there are issues. Nonetheless, to
respond to Barton's short term emergency measures, it would be usefule to
know whther a negawatt program across the WSCC can be im[plemented by June.
=====================================
|
3,421 |
Subject: ISC - Symposium - Wings of Excellence Awards
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1558.
=====================================
Interested in meeting students, business leaders, politicians and decision
makers from around the world in a setting that fosters dialogue and
communication? Why not apply/compete for a place in the 32nd ISC symposium
at University of St. Gallen, Switzerland. The symposium takes place from
May 23 to 25 (Note that this conflicts with the Haas IBD program) 2002.
Full details are available at:
http://www.isc-symposium.org/isc/31stsymposium/32ndsymposium.htm
Application requirements are described below:
Topic: "Pushing Limits - Questioning Goals"
Applicants' qualifications
Undergraduate and postgraduate students in all fields of study
enrolled at regular universities throughout the world, born in 1972
or after.
Substance
We ask you to contribute your visions and entrepreneurial ideas.
Your contribution can be an essay, a scenario, a project report or
proposal, a multimedia presentation, an entrepreneurial concept or
any other form of professional work which you would like to
present to the audience of the 32nd ISC-Symposium. It should be
constructive, provocative or instructive, inspiring thoughts and
actions and introducing a new approach or unconventional ideas. It
has to be the original work of the author.
Format
5 to 7 pages, max. 2100 words (excl. bibl.) No name on the front
page or any subsequent page. Accompanied by a 3.5'' high
density disk containing the whole essay (no manual hyphenation).
Disk
The disk label should contain your name, operating system (MS
Windows or MacOS) and the application used.
Video
VHS max. 15 minutes, label shall contain your name.
Language
English, German or French
Deadline
February 15, 2002 (date of postmark)
Copies
Please submit 2 copies of your contribution, accompanied by the
attached application form, proof of current enrollment, a 3.5'' high
density disk containing the whole essay (no manual hyphenation),
a signed letter of confirmation that your contribution is your own
work and 1 passport-size photograph. The material will not be
returned and may be used for ISC publication and/or included in
the ISC website.
Sample Essays
You find last year's winner essay of the ISC Wings of Excellence
Award in our Archive under the menu point Symposium and Past
Symposium.
===============================
Sebastian Teunissen
Executive Director
Clausen Center for International Business and Policy
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
=====================================
|
3,422 |
Subject: Re: AB 23XX Bad Bill Alert
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28819.
=====================================
I've taken a quick look at the bill and have attached for easy viewing. Few
questions.
Mike,
I understand from our conversation yesterday that your following this on
behalf of Questar. Do we know if the other pipelines have been active in any
discussions on this bill?
What about the generators? Have then been involved, since presumably, their
in need of lots more capacity (and they're referenced in the bill)?
What about large customers? They been screaming for more infrastructure,
too, and many have blamed SoCalGas (and the PUC) for not delivering it.
Do we know if pipelines, generators, large customers are supporting or
opposing the bill? I'll try to check around, too, in between the electric
mayhem.
There doesn't seem to be anything in the bill that prevents the interstates
from building into the state.
If that's true, wouldn't the PUC take those projects into account when doing
its analysis and only require the utility to construct (and noncore to take)
capacity that isn't already being met by others (i.e., interstates) bringing
pipe into the state?
Any info you can provide on these fronts would be very useful. Don't want
Enron too far out in front of opposition until we find out a bit more
regarding 1) whose fer and agin it and 2) analysis of what the bill actually
does/does not do.
Thanks again for the heads up.
Best,
Jeff
James D Steffes
07/17/2001 07:43 AM
To: Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Paul
Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate
Subject: AB 23XX Bad Bill Alert
Harry --
Can you track down this bill and determine impact? We'll discuss on Thursday.
Jim
---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 07/17/2001
07:43 AM ---------------------------
MDay <[email protected]> on 07/16/2001 06:03:33 PM
To: "'Bev Hansen, Enron lobbyist'" <[email protected]>, "'Hedy Govenar, Enron
Sacto lobbyist'" <[email protected]>, "'Scott Govenar, Enron lobbyist'"
<[email protected]>, "'Harry Kingerski'" <[email protected]>, "'Jim
Steffes, Enron'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: AB 23XX Bad Bill Alert
Is AB 23XX moving with a chance of passage? I just learned that this
Pescetti bill that was AB 1425 was revived as a 2X bill. It is very
anti-competitive, and could hurt a number of TW, EES, or ENA gas deals by
binding customers to 100% utility service through the imposition of large
exit fees by the CPUC. If there is a chance that it moves, we need to
discuss the effect of this bill. Mike Day
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/abx2_23_bill_20010625_amend
ed_sen.pdf
=====================================
|
3,423 |
Subject: Re: Notice of State Audit - Corrected Version
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1551.
=====================================
I don't know if they have the authority, and I could be wrong, but this looks
like an obvious set up by the administration. Hold up a report from your
auditor that sez, "it makes now sense to have the two separate, Poolco is the
only way to go, and they must be merged." Then legislation is launched, on
the basis of the auditor's recommendation, to merge the PX and the ISO in
California. Looks like an audit whose message we'll want to pre-empt well in
advance of the report going public.
Susan J Mara
09/18/2000 03:44 PM
To: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary
Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES
cc: [email protected]
Subject: Notice of State Audit - Corrected Version
Does the state of CA have the authority to do this?
---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 09/18/2000 01:41
PM ---------------------------
"Fuller, Don" <[email protected]>@caiso.com> on 09/14/2000 02:04:36 PM
Sent by: "Happ, Susan" <[email protected]>
To: ISO Market Participants
<IMCEAEX-_O=CAISO_OU=CORPORATE_CN=DISTRIBUTION+20LISTS_CN=ISO+20MARKET+20PARTI
[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Notice of State Audit - Corrected Version
Market Participants:
Attached please find a notice from the state auditor informing the ISO that
it will undertake an audit of the operations of the Independent System
Operator and its relationship with the California Power Exchange. The
notice sets forth the Goverment Code sections that the state auditor relies
on for access to ISO records and property (the notice suggests that the
state auditor has access to all ISO records and property) and states how the
state auditor will treat confidential information. The state auditor has
scheduled a meeting with the ISO to commence the audit process on Monday
September 18. ISO provides this notice in accordance with Tariff section
20.3.4, and requests that Market Participant's inform the ISO by noon on
Friday of any concerns to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , tel
916-608-7144.
Jeanne M. Sol,
Regulatory Counsel
California ISO
(916) 608-7144
____________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
The Foregoing e-Mail Communication (Together With Any Attachments Thereto)
Is Intended For The Designated Recipient(s) Only. Its Terms May Be
Confidential And Protected By Attorney/Client Privilege or Other Applicable
Privileges. Unauthorized Use, Dissemination, Distribution, Or Reproduction
Of This Message Is Strictly Prohibited.
- 9-14-1st page audit.pdf
- 9-14Audit2.pdf
=====================================
|
3,424 |
Subject: Re: AVAILABILITY for call today
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/2687.
=====================================
need to be 12:30
Lysa Akin@ECT
12/18/2000 12:56 PM
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: AVAILABILITY for call today
Can you do it prior to 1:30pm??
---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 12/18/2000 11:02 AM
---------------------------
Susan J Mara@ENRON
12/18/2000 10:57 AM
To: Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: AVAILABILITY for call today
I have ab appointment at 4:00, so I would have to do it from the car and I
would not have nmuch time -- any time until 1:30 pm is better.
Lysa Akin@ECT
12/18/2000 10:46 AM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron
cc: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT, Joseph
Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: AVAILABILITY for call today
Please advise if you would be available for a call at 3:30pm Pacific time
today.
---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 12/18/2000 10:51 AM
---------------------------
Mary Hain
12/18/2000 10:43 AM
To: Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: call today
Please get times when people are available. Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 12/18/2000 10:52 AM
---------------------------
Mary Hain
12/18/2000 10:42 AM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: call today
I'd like to set up a call for this afternoon to discuss the FERC's order, in
general. Also, in an hour or so I'll also be forwarding a proposed issue
list on rehearing so we can talk about it.
Lysa Akin
12/18/2000 09:53 AM
To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: call today
I got your message after I sent you this update. I sent a note to everyone I
contacted, advising the call would not take place.
Mary Hain
12/18/2000 09:52 AM
To: Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: call today
Jim says he doesn't want to have a conference call yet.
Lysa Akin
12/18/2000 09:26 AM
To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: call today
regarding the call you asked me to set up:
Jim is is DC with Rick and Steve. Marcia is paging him to see if he is
available at 2:30pm Central/3:30pm Eastern
I left a message wither Bernadette to call me back regarding Joe and Sarah's
availability at 3:30pm Eastern
Jeff indicated is he available at 12:30 Pacific.
I left a message w/Sue asking if she can make it at 12:30pm.
Maureen advised that Steve might be able to make it at 3:30pm Eastern, so I
will make sure she has all the info so that she can page him.
I left a message for Richard to call me back
=====================================
|
3,425 |
Subject: Re:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/882.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 11/07/2000 01:35 PM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
11/07/2000 01:19 PM
To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J
Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re:
Dave Parquet and I spoke with Smutney of IEP re: herding the cats.
In true "swedish hostage syndrome" fashion, Smutney informed us that none of
IEP's members has screamed about the FERC-proposed cap. He added that the
"industry" is under siege and that "just saying no" to price caps isn't
politically tenable. He also said that he hadn't planned on mentioning price
caps in his remarks. We expressed concern that it would be hard for the head
of California's generator association to avoid the topic.
We stressed the importance of having IEP disagree with FERC's cap proposal
and offered the following message points:
Price caps have failed in the past and they'll fail again.
FERC's and California's immediate goal ought to be to make the bold reforms
necessary to create real, competitive markets and eliminate the need for
price caps altogether.
The most important reforms include:
Reforming California's siting laws to permit entry of supply---best way to
undermine "high" prices is easy entry by competitors
Reforming the PUC review of utility purchases
Give the utilities financial incentives to purchase efficiently (i.e.,
similar to California's gas market, where a benchmark is set and the IOUs
profit or lose on the basis of whether the IOU does better or worse than the
benchmark). It ain't rocket science, and it works.
The CPUC gets out of the way and stops the practice of "after-the-fact"
reviews of power purchases.
Creating a retail market
If California/FERC adopt these reforms, the need for caps will vanish.
FERC got a lot right in the order, but the price cap proposal is flawed.
Price is too low to incent development of peakers---well-functioning,
efficient markets require peakers.
Information disclosure provisions are too costly and unnecessary.
Disincents energy efficiency.
IEP written comments will offer suggestions on how to remedy the flaws in the
proposed cap.
Smutney was comfortable with these points and is open to hearing more from us
today and tomorrow. If folks have comments on these points, or have others
we should discuss with Smutney, don't hesitate.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,426 |
Subject: Credit Redesign - REVISED Indemnity Agreement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/123.
=====================================
Dear Market Participants:
On August 18th, we sent out the attached email asking all Participants for
their
assistance in executing an Indemnity Agreement, which was a new document
associated with the recently completed Credit Redesign Project. We have since
taken feedback received from Participants and made some clarifying revisions
to
the Indemnity Agreement. Revisions were made in the following sections:
INDEMNITY SECTION
Paragraph 1,3
GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION
Paragraph 7 (b)
Attached is the REVISED Indemnity Agreement which covers all CalPX-provided
pool
performance bonds. Additionally, we have attached a copy of the Core and CTS
Market Pool Performance Bonds. We thank you in advance for your timely
handling of these materials, and we respectfully request that you complete the
enclosed by September 15, 2000.
If you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact Clark
Cheng at (626) 537-3243.
(See attached file: AIGINDEMNITYAGREEMENT_REV.doc)
IMPORTANT NOTE: Please print Indemnity Agreement attachment on legal size
paper.
(See attached file: CPXFINALCOREMARKETBOND.doc)
(See attached file: CPXFINALCTSMARKETBOND.doc)
(Embedded image moved to file: pic04269.pcx)
August 18, 2000
Dear Market Participants:
The California Power Exchange has just completed a comprehensive credit
redesign. Our new credit policies now incorporate new credit methodologies
similar to those used at major commodity exchanges. Specifically, CalPX now
recognizes more aspects of the actual market volatility and individual
portfolio
risk in order to provide quantifiable management information on the collateral
accounts of participants while maintaining the integrity of our markets. We
have also combined financial requirements for our CORE (Day-Ahead, Day-Of and
Real Time) and CTS (Forwards) markets. The incorporation of a $20 million
default bond in our CORE market and a liquidity line up to $50 million in our
CTS market provide insurance protection in the event of a default and allow
timely management of cash flow in the markets.
Enclosed for your review are all the necessary documents pertaining to our
credit redesign, including a brief instruction sheet to assist you with the
completion of these documents. We thank you in advance for your timely
handling
of these materials, and we respectfully request that you complete the enclosed
by August 31, 2000.
If you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact Clark
Cheng at (626) 537-3243.
- AIGINDEMNITYAGREEMENT_REV.doc
- CPXFINALCOREMARKETBOND.doc
- CPXFINALCTSMARKETBOND.doc
- pic04269.pcx
=====================================
|
3,427 |
Subject: Re: SDG&E
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3228.
=====================================
---------------------- Forwarded by Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT on 11/08/2000
12:20 PM ---------------------------
From: Chris H Foster on 11/08/2000 06:47 AM
To: Thane Twiggs/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: SDG&E
Re: SDG&E, I don't think the timing is "right" to try to sell them a large
amount of energy under a full requriements structure. In fact, the timing
might not ever be "right." A few thoughts:
1. Traders do not want to sell large quantities for long terms all at once.
We have recently sold numerous 50 MW blocks to several munis in CA as well as
PG&E. That is the type of business with which we are most comfortable and we
can be most profitable.
2. We do not generally want to sell shaped products where the quantity
changes each hour according to a distribution representing load. This is
because we do not own generation and it is difficult to buy hourly
quantities. Traders sell 25 MW blocks for peak and off peak hours. Selling a
"shape " that requires each hour's deliveries to differ from the previous one
is difficult from a supply and scheduling perspective.
3. We are working with SDG&E to try to put master agreements in place and
still have some material contract issues to resolve.
For these reasons, I think it best that we do not aggressively promote the
full requirements deal with SDG&E at this time.
I want to bring this issue to some resolution for the time being so people
are not waiting on us for someting.
Please let me know if you have any comments or questions.
C
From: Thane Twiggs@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 09/19/2000 07:47 AM CDT
To: Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: SDG&E
Here is hourly load profile data from SDG&E. If this is not hlpful or you
need something different let me know. Here is SDG&E's explanation about the
load profile.
SDG&E developed the following 1999 static load profiles based upon a three
(3) year average of electrical use (1994-1996). Rate class load estimates are
presented in kWh and local time. Please be advised that except for the
streetlighting class of customers, SDG&E no longer uses static load profiles.
The static load profiles for 1999 are being provided to you at your request
and are intended to be illustrative only. SDG&E does not warrant any
information contained in the static load profiles nor does SDG&E ensure the
accuracy of the static load profiles. You are solely responsible for your
selection of these static load profiles provided to you by SDG&E and you are
solely responsible for any results if they are used by you.
?
=====================================
|
3,428 |
Subject: Telecommunications, E-commerce, the Internet.... oh my!
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/147.
=====================================
First, let me thank all of you who have been drafted into the Enron
Communications Army. Communications is rapidly becoming a core business and
function of Enron and as ECI expands both domestically and internationally,
it will require a significant amount of the State Government Affairs group's
support. You all had high draft numbers because you have either expressed an
interest in working on telecom and e-commerce, and/or are in a strategic
position to assist ECI's efforts. My understanding from Rick is that you
will be out on point in your respective regions or in Aleck's case Country,
in identifying issues of interest for ECI, provide advocacy and
problem-solving for ECI's regional projects (i.e., fiber builds in the South
-- Mr. Robinson), manage regulatory/legislative efforts, and help increase
ECI's visibility with your local policymakers. That said, hopefully your
interest will stay high and positive and this won't seem like the real Army
-- the one with the drill sergeants and all.
Now that we have an informal "Team" in place (and will likely add a few more
folks) to actively monitor and participate in telecom, please feel free to
call/e-mail/visit with myself, one another, or any ECI person to discuss any
issue or answer any question. I know that many of us feel pretty overwhelmed
by these issues and I don't want anyone to be intimidated. We have fantastic
people here at ECI who can quickly bring you up to speed or provide feedback
on a variety of concerns. ECI is doing some revolutionary things and we will
become well-known very soon. You will get to be a part of that.
Please let me know what issues seem hot in your areas, what types of things
you feel you should know more about, and how much focus you believe you will
able to give telecom in addition to the workload you already have. There is
always something going on in this industry and we will need to balance
interests carefully. Sue Nord and I will be getting out issue books to the
whole State GA group here in the coming weeks. This should be a useful tool
to help you prioritize your workload. I will be sending on to you more clips
about ECI, our products, and internal info to give you a better feel for what
we are trying to accomplish. We may also start some conference calls (good
god not another one!) and expect to caucus when we meet at group functions.
Also, everyone should own a Newton's Telecom Dictionary, e-mail me if you
don't have one.
I am very excited to be working alongside all of you and hope we can keep an
interactive dialogue of our progress and deeds.
Best,
Scott
=====================================
|
3,429 |
Subject: RE: CMTA Hosting President Bush 10-17-01 RSVP ASAP
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/535.
=====================================
Boy, I gotta tell you, the demands for those tickets are NOT pouring in. Hope the thing in D.C. went OK last week.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Nord, Sue
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 10:15 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: CMTA Hosting President Bush 10-17-01 RSVP ASAP
Thanks for the offer. I don't think they let the likes of me into those events!
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:25 PM
To: Shapiro, Richard; Kean, Steven J.; Steffes, James D.; Kaufman, Paul;
Mara, Susan; Robertson, Linda; Nord, Sue; Guerrero, Janel; Landwehr,
Susan M.
Subject: FW: CMTA Hosting President Bush 10-17-01 RSVP ASAP
FYI. I don't know if this means that Sue and I both get a ticket, or if there's only one. If someone from Houston--or another office--is interested, we'd be happy to accommodate. Otherwise, I'm sure that we'll take full advantage of the opporunity. Just let us know.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack M. Stewart, President - CMTA [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:54 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: CMTA Hosting President Bush 10-17-01 RSVP ASAP
Dear CMTA Members:
From: Jack Stewart, President - California Manufacturers & Technology
Association
The California Manufacturers & Technology Association is hosting a major
foreign policy and international trade speech by President George Bush!
President Bush is making the stop as he travels to China on a two-day state
visit and the White House asked us just yesterday to host the event.
? Sacramento Memorial Auditorium
? 11:00 am to noon
? October 17th, 2001
? Yes, that's next Wednesday!
As a valued CMTA member, a complimentary ticket has been reserved for you or
another employee of your company.
BUT YOU MUST RSVP WITH YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER to Geri Royer at
916-498-3330 or [email protected] by 4:00pm (PDT), October 12th, 2001.
Please take advantage of this opportunity that your CMTA membership affords
you.
If you would like to come in the night of October 16, we have held a block
of rooms at the Sacramento Hyatt Regency Hotel (916/443-1234) at a rate of
$140 night. Just ask to reserve your room under the CMTA block.
Reservations must also be made by October 12 to guarantee this rate.
This is a great opportunity to support the President and send him off on his
first foreign trip since the terrorist attacks on September 11.
As you know, security will be tight so there cannot be any exceptions on the
October 12, 4:00pm (PDT) RSVP DEADLINE.
We hope to hear back from you quickly and look forward to seeing you in
Sacramento next Wednesday.
=====================================
|
3,430 |
Subject: Re: Reactive Statement to Davis' Plan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8255.
=====================================
FYI. Today Craig Barrett, CEO of Intel, publicly opposed the "state
takeover" plan released by California's Treasurer last Friday, saying, "I'm
not a great fan of government getting involved in the private sector,
especially delivering a key commodity to the private sector."
(SF Chronicle, 01.09.01)
Might be a good opportunity to try in earnest to enlist Silicon Valley in our
efforts to get California moving in the right direction, despite itself.
Barrett said the answer is easing siting rules in order to get more power on
line sooner and blamed officials who've opposed power plants for seriously
exacerbating the problems in California.
Because of CA' power woes, Barrett said that he'd build new facilities
anywhere but in California.
Jeff
Karen Denne
01/09/2001 03:02 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Reactive Statement to Davis' Plan
The following is a draft reactive statement to Gov. Davis' State of the State
address last night. If you have any comments or changes, please let me know
so I can route a final version. Thanks! kd
We're disappointed with Gov. Davis' plan to address the energy crisis in
California. While the governor has shown some recognition of the problem,
which is simply an issue of supply and demand, we disagree with his proposed
solutions. There are four problems in the California market: excess reliance
on spot markets, insufficient demand side response, insufficient supplies,
and financially unstable institutions. The solutions, simply put, should be
to decrease demand, increase supply, reduce exposure to spot prices and
provide financial support to the utilities. Gov. Davis' eight points do not
address the fundamental supply and demand issue. Furthermore, the governor's
rhetoric detracts from implementing real solutions.
If pressed on specifics:
Rather than mandating sales of power in-state, California would be better
served by providing the utilities with strong incentives to enter into
long-term contracts and by requiring them to buy some portion of their
forward requirements from new in-state generation.
We do not understand how Gov. Davis has the constitutionality to mandate the
flow of electricity into California, particularly in states that export to
California.
The governor failed to address the credit issue of the state's two utilities
(possible solution:near-term credit guarantees).
=====================================
|
3,431 |
Subject: AB 2xx to Suspense
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13025.
=====================================
Assemblywoman Ellen Corbett took up AB 2xx this morning in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.? Although it raises revenue and is not subject to
the Suspense File rule, Migden sent the bill to Suspense (to be voted upon
next Wednesday, May 30).
Corbett said that Californians "have suffered long enough from greedy energy
sellers."? She explained the bill and the 3-tier structure of the profits
tax.? She said that "excessively greedy profits will be returned to the
people through the General Fund."? She said that the results of this greed
is that budget cuts are being forced to be made.? She argues that California
is a good place for the generators to do business.? According to Dept. of
Finance, this bill could raise $6 billion.
Lenny Goldberg, on behalf of TURN, UCAN, and CTRA, spoke in support of the
bill.
Speaking in opposition were Fred Main (California Chamber) and Carrie Lee
Coke (CMTA).
Assemblywoman Goldberg inquired why businesses are opposed to this bill
because they are suffering under higher energy prices.
Assemblywoman Thom said that "a fair, healthy profit is permitted" under
this bill.
Assemblywoman Alquist is a supporter of the bill.? She said that the
business community should back the Legislature to enact this bill.
Assemblyman Ashburn asked about the base price ($60).? He suggested
amendments for long-term contracts.? He also argued more generation and
supply is needed.
Assemblyman Wright said that the bill will result in a reduction in output.?
He stated that he would vote no on this bill.
Assemblywoman Pavley said that FERC has failed to do its job.? Reasonable
profits are being allowed under this bill.
Assemblywoman Wiggins said that there is public clamor for this bill.? She
asked for an explanation of the rebuttable presumption language.
Assemblywoman Daucher asked whether the Governor has a position on this
bill.? Dept. of Finance said no.? Corbett said that the Governor has
indicated he might support a measure along these lines.
Possible amendments to this bill were suggested to the author by
Assemblywoman Migden, including:
1.? Exempt new power plants constructed in this state.
2.? Exempt long-term contracts (state only or all???)
3.? Raise the base price from $60 to $100
4.? Exempt QFs from the bill
From what I understand, this bill was to go out today (and not to Suspense)
if these amendments were made.? However, Corbett has not agreed to them yet.
Chris Micheli, Esq.
Carpenter Snodgrass & Associates
1201 K Street, Suite 710
Sacramento, CA? 95814
(916) 447-2251
FAX: (916) 445-5624
EMAIL: [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,432 |
Subject: FW: EL01-68-000 Request to Make a Statement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Alan; Steffes', 'James D.', 'Comnes', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/645.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Comnes, Alan
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 2:31 PM
To: Mara, Susan; Perrino, Dave; Walton, Steve; Alvarez, Ray; Kaufman, Paul; Crandall, Sean; Belden, Tim
Subject: FW: EL01-68-000 Request to Make a Statement
Importance: High
FYI,
In the next day or so I will draft talking points on the assumption our request to speak will be granted.
At this point, I am aware of the following other speakers: Mike Naeve (former FERC Commissioner) for PGE and Richard Tabors for Powerex. Transaction Finality Group (TGF) or a subset thereof will also ask for an opportunity to speak using Tabors as their spokesperson. I will be coordinating with Tabors but we decided to get Enron's name in solo to preserve our opportunity to take a different view.
Alan Comnes
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank, Robert
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Comnes, Alan; Steffes, James D.
Subject: FW: EL01-68-000 Request to Make a Statement
Importance: High
RE: Docket EL01-68-000 Investigation of Wholesale Rates of Public Utility Sellers of Energy and Ancillary Services in the Western Systems Coordinating Council.
Dear Mr. Boergers:
Enron Power Marketing Inc. (EPMI) respectfully requests the opportunity to make a statement during the October 29, 2001 technical conference in the above-referenced proceeding. EPMI would appreciate the opportunity to allow the following representative to make a statement on its behalf:
G. Alan Comnes,
Director, Government Affairs
Enron Corp.
121 SW Salmon Street
Portland, OR 97204
email: [email protected]
telephone: 503-464-8129
EPMI operates as a marketer of electric power and natural gas in markets throughout the Western Systems Coordinating Council (WSCC). EPMI has been an active participant in this and related dockets and has submitted written comments pertaining to Westwide price mitigation on both May 7, 2001and August 20, 2001. In addition to identifying problems created by continued price mitigation in the WSCC, EPMI will identify problems that will be created if the Commission were to inconsistently apply price mitigation in the WSCC or make rule changes that create further uncertainty in the marketplace. Because of EPMI's unique position as a power marketer that operates throughout the WSCC, it has a unique perspective to provide the Commission and workshop participants.
A letter making the same request, along with Mr. Comnes' credentials, will be filed with the Commission tomorrow. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 713-853-3180.
Sincerely,
Robert J. Frank
=====================================
|
3,433 |
Subject: nan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4738.
=====================================
FYI Good quotes:
December 13, 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Dynegy CEO: Still Supplying Power To Calif ISO
NEW YORK -- Dynegy Inc. (DYN) continues to supply the California electricity
grid with power - despite some concerns that it won't be paid for the
supplies, Dynegy chairman Stephen Bergstrom told Dow Jones Newswires
Wednesday.
The California Independent System Operator said Wednesday that it was on the
verge of rolling blackouts because about 12 suppliers had stopped selling
power to the grid operator due to qualms about the credit of the ISO and the
state's utilities.
Among traders, Dynegy's name quickly came up as one of the companies not
selling to the ISO, but Bergstrom said that isn't the case.
"We continue to provide all the power that the ISO asks for. We did send a
letter Friday to the ISO and the Power Exchange asking for assurance of
payment for the power we're producing. And in the last 24 hours, we've gotten
more comfortable about that assurance," Bergstrom said.
"We never once said, 'If you don't do this, we're shutting down,"' he added.
Dynegy - which operates about 2,500 megawatts of generating stations in
California, or about 5% of the state's capacity - "didn't threaten in any way
to not sell power," Bergstrom said, adding nor could it due to a federal
order Friday.
But out-of-state suppliers that have decided not to supply the ISO are making
prudent, normal business decisions, according to Bergstrom.
"PG&E and Edison International have said they may go bankrupt. Out-of-state
suppliers probably aren't selling unless there's credit protection. You have
a fiduciary responsibility to your shareholders to get assurance that you're
going to get paid," he said.
"We're giving all they ask, and we have done so all along. I think that's the
case for most of the in-state generators," said Bergstrom.
For Dynegy, such assurance for ISO purchases would have to come from some
other entity than California's investor-owned utilities, whose credit is no
longer dependable, Bergstrom said. But he wouldn't say what entity had made
him feel more comfortable that Dynegy will be paid.
-By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; [email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Briefing Book for: DYN | EIX | PCG | SRE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Return to top of page | Format for printing
Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright and reprint information.
=====================================
|
3,434 |
Subject: Tx Governor appoints Former Enron Exex to PUC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/27829.
=====================================
Perry fills one spot on PUC
Former Enron exec draws opposition
By JANET ELLIOTT
Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN -- Mario Max Yzaguirre, a former Enron executive, was appointed
Wednesday by Gov. Rick Perry to the state agency that is overseeing
electricity deregulation in Texas.
Yzaguirre was named to replace Judy Walsh on the three-member Public Utility
Commission of Texas.
Yzaguirre, of South Padre Island, recently resigned as president of Enron's
Mexico operations. He formerly worked as a lawyer at Houston's Vinson &
Elkins.
In 1989, Yzaguirre was fined $15,000 after pleading guilty to a federal
charge of killing a whooping crane while hunting near the Aransas National
Wildlife Refuge north of Corpus Christi. Yzaguirre, who thought he was
shooting at a snow goose, also paid $6,480 in restitution to the state over
the death of the endangered bird.
He is the son of former University of Texas Regent Mario Yzaguirre of
Brownsville.
The governor's office also is working to replace Chairman Pat Wood III, who
stepped down after President Bush named him to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, which oversees interstate electricity transmission. Yzaguirre
will join Commissioner Brett Perlman, a former business consultant.
Janee Briesemeister, a consumer advocate who monitors the PUC, said the
appointment of a energy industry insider "sends the wrong signal to consumers
in the state, particularly when that energy company is Enron, which has
profited handsomely from the energy crisis in California."
"While resignation of his position at Enron and divestiture of any
energy-related stock holdings may meet the technical requirements of the law,
the intent of the law is to eliminate even the perception of a conflict or
impropriety," said Briesemeister, senior policy analyst for Consumers Union.
"Regardless of his actions while commissioner, a perceived conflict could
limit his effectiveness."
The PUC is monitoring the deregulation of the Texas electric market, set to
begin Jan. 1. Deregulation in California has resulted in skyrocketing energy
costs and electricity shortages. The PUC also oversees the telecommunications
market.
Yzaguirre had been with Enron from 1995 until his recent resignation. Enron
is Houston's largest company in terms of revenues, generating $100.8 billion
in 2000.
Enron is vying to become a player in the deregulated Texas market. It formed
the New Power Co., a nationwide power and natural gas retail marketing
concern catering to residential and small-business customers.
The company is a joint venture of Enron, IBM and AOL Time Warner.
=====================================
|
3,435 |
Subject: Stage 3, rotating blackouts
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4870.
=====================================
ENERGY ALERT FROM THE SILICON VALLEY MANUFACTURING GROUP
At 11:46 this morning the California ISO announced a Stage 3 alert, and
immediately ordered rotating outages throughout the state. At a minimum,
consumers in blocks 9H through 10B are projected be effected by rotating
blackouts. The outages will last until at least 2:00 p.m. today, while the
Stage 3 alert will be in effect until midnight tonight.
In an ongoing effort to ensure the integrity and reliability of our local
electricity grid, the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group is urging member
companies to immediately voluntarily reduce their use of electricity to
avoid the imminent threat of rolling blackouts.
Below, the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group is providing energy
conservation action items, which can be used immediately to help avoid a
more serious energy shortfall. Please incorporate these tips into your dail=
y
routine while in the office and at home.
Following are some suggestions by PG&E to reduce electric demand today, and
through this time of short supply.
? Turn off lights when they are not needed. Turn off lights in unoccupied
rooms.
? Send documents via email instead of fax.
? Turn off PCs, monitors, printers, and copiers when not in use or not
needed. If you can, simply turn off the power strip after shutting down you=
r
computer and peripherals. If you cannot turn off the whole computer, turn
off the monitor and the printer.
? Avoid using major appliances this afternoon and early evening, if
possible. If you must, do only full loads when using your dishwasher and
clothes washer. Use the cold water setting whenever possible, and select th=
e
air-dry setting, rather than heat-dry setting on your dishwasher, if you
can.
? Unplug energy leaking electronic equipment. Many new electronic devices
(TVs, VCRs, computer peripherals, etc.) use electricity even when turned
off. If possible, unplug electronic devices with block-shaped transformers
on the plug when not in use.
? Turn off lights in unoccupied rooms. Turn off unnecessary and decorative
lighting around your home and office.
? Cook in your toaster oven, microwave or broiler oven. They use half the
energy of a regular oven.
? Install motion detectors to control lighting in frequently unoccupied
areas such as storage rooms, copy rooms and rest rooms.
? Retrofit incandescent bulbs with energy efficient fluorescents. Seventy
percent of what comes off the 100-watt bulb is heat, not light.
For more energy saving tips, please contact PG&E=01,s Smarter Energy Line a=
t
1-800-933-9555. To learn more about the CAISO=01,s Power Watch program,
please go to their web site at www.caiso.com.
=====================================
|
3,436 |
Subject: Re: FW: PUC Votes to Suspend Direct Access Effective September
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1663.
=====================================
Can you fax the order? 713-646-2379
From: Jeff Dasovich/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/20/2001 02:50 PM
To: Steven J Kean/ENRON@enronXgate, Tim Belden/ENRON@enronXgate, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Alan Comnes/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate, Kristin Walsh/ENRON@enronXgate, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Stephen Swain/ENRON@enronXgate, John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Paul Kaufman/ENRON@enronXgate, James D Steffes/ENRON@enronXgate, Christopher F Calger/ENRON@enronXgate, Susan J Mara/ENRON@enronXgate, Don Black/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Richter/ENRON@enronXgate, Louise Kitchen/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/ENRON@enronXgate, Linda Robertson/ENRON@enronXgate, Harry Kingerski/ENRON@enronXgate, Karen Denne/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Palmer/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Shapiro/ENRON@enronXgate, Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Mellencamp/ENRON@enronXgate, Kelly Higgason/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: FW: PUC Votes to Suspend Direct Access Effective September 20th, But Continues to Hold Out Threat of Retroactivity
The Commission also delayed a decision on whether contract renewal will be included under the suspension.
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:46 PM
To: Kean, Steven J.; Belden, Tim; Sharp, Vicki; Blachman, Jeremy; Comnes, Alan; Tribolet, Michael; Walsh, Kristin; Delainey, David; Leff, Dan; Frazier, Lamar; Keeney, Kevin; Gahn, Scott; Swain, Steve; Lavorato, John; Kaufman, Paul; Steffes, James D.; Calger, Christopher F.; Mara, Susan; Black, Don; Richter, Jeff; Kitchen, Louise; Dietrich, Janet; Mara, Susan; Robertson, Linda; Kingerski, Harry; Denne, Karen; Palmer, Mark A. (PR); Shapiro, Richard; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; Higgason, Kelly; Whalley, Greg
Subject: PUC Votes to Suspend Direct Access Effective September 20th, But Continues to Hold Out Threat of Retroactivity
? The commission suspended Direct Access effective September 20th.
? The decision orders the utilities to stop accepting DASRs for contracts executed after 9.20.01.
? But astonishingly, the language in the proposed decision states that the Commission will take more time to consider whether the effective date should be pushed back to July 1. In short, that battle continues.
? How the Commission will proceed in continuing to consider retroactivity is uncertain at this time.
? The Commission held over until its next meeting the decision regarding the rate agreement between DWR and the PUC.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,437 |
Subject: Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1573.
=====================================
Vince --
Please feel free to also call Jeff Dasovich (415-782-7822) in our San
Fransisco office. He has been very involved in the California market
discussions and presented before FERC during their field hearings. He knows
the profs you are meeting with and has some great insights into our positions.
Jeff also attended Berkeley as an undergrad and is now attending their
B-school in the evenings.
Thanks.
Jim Steffes
---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/HOU/EES on 09/20/2000
09:33 AM ---------------------------
From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 09/20/2000 09:21 AM
Sent by: Steven J Kean@ENRON
To: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth
Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley
Maureen -- please send Vince my California testimony and the talking point
presentation for Jeff Skilling at the National Press Club.
Eliz-- keep Vince on the distribution list for the documents we are
generating now to repond to the California situation.
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 09:18 AM -----
Vince J Kaminski@ECT
09/18/2000 01:26 PM
To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Charlene Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Celeste Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J
Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron
Subject: Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley
Steve,
I am a lead recruiter at the University of California at Berkeley for
Enron Analyst/Associate program.
I contacted several friends who work at Berkeley and received an invitation
from one of them to make a presentation at the weekly Faculty Seminar
of the Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research.
The students and faculty members from the business school will be also
invited.
Berkeley in general, and Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations
Research in
particular, are important centers of academic research on electricity markets
(S. Oren works very closely with Severin Borenstein).
My presentation will focus on the Analyst/Associate program. I shall also
have
an opportunity to discuss the power markets in California (I expect many
questions) before many experts who are very important to shaping
public opinion and regulatory agenda.
Please, let me know who in you group could help me in preparing this
presentation
and in presenting Enron's point of view in a more effective way.
Vince
FYI. The name of my friend who invited me:
Shmuel S. Oren, Professor
Dept. of Industrial Engineering
and Operations Research
4117 Etcheverry Hall
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720-1777
=====================================
|
3,438 |
Subject: CPUC Hearing - Day 1
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4196.
=====================================
General
Enron and CEC testimony was allowed in to the case with the understanding
that our real time pricing proposals can't be implemented by June 1, but the
proposals may be useful for long term direction of ratemaking in California.
Utilities will file testimony by Friday evaluating the billing constraints on
each of the various parties' proposals.
Entire day was used for SCE witness. Plan was for both utilities to be done
today.
Questions represented a mix of interest in allocation of increase among
classes and rate design within class. Line of questioning was generally true
to their filed position.
Subdued tone. Not one objection all day.
Schedule of witnesses will go pretty much day to day. Wednesday - an
agricultural panel, then PG&E. Should take up most of day.
SCE Witness (Dr. Jazayeri)
Costs of purchases from DWR are not known at this time. Can't properly
design TOU rates without this information. Once info is known, can reflect,
but unlikely before next March when general rate case with rate design is
filed for 2003.
Demand response has not been reflected in rate design. Not possible to
anticipate/measure elasticity at this time.
Net short occurs in all time periods, in MWs: summer on-peak, 5,400; summer
mid-peak, 4,800; summer off-peak, 3,000; nonsummer mid-peak, 3,500, nonsummer
off-peak, 2,100.
Top 100 hours is good for allocating capacity but not energy. Doesn't
support that method.
Supports no application of surcharge to DA if details are worked out in
legislation, i.e., rules for arbitraging standard offer.
Summer/winter ratio of rates (about 2:1) based on judgement. Actual costs
(DWR) not known. Open to adjustment once info is available.
Regarding tiers for non-TOU, recognizes may be penalty to large, efficient
users just because they are large. This is unfortunate. Can't design rates
customer by customer.
Prefers 2 month vs 12 month allocation of shortfall (Mar 27 - Jun 1 rate
increase) because fo financial burden to SCE of carrying cost.
Agrees fixed TOU rates do not adjust to market conditions but that's the way
rates are. Behavior of prices in market is uncertain anyway.
If DWR revenue requirement goes up, that will be presented to PUC and we'll
adjust then.
Judge's questions:
Per ACR, interested in rates segmented by SIC codes and prior year's usage.
Response was administrative problems make difficult if not impossible.
How will you implement Governor's 20/20 plan? Will compare daily average use
this year to last year. If down 20%, get 20% credit. Will be a simple
yes/no criteria and will not involve as many disputes as customer by customer
rates.
=====================================
|
3,439 |
Subject: Reminder: MEET THE RECRUITMENT CENTER ACCOUNT MANAGERS
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/2064.
=====================================
Hi everyone,
Hope you're having a nice Thanksgiving break. Just a friendly reminder on the following (again, if you plan to attend, please respond to me directly and indicate which evening):
Fellow Evening Haasians,
Who are these so called account managers, Rich, Jenny and Mark? What do they do? How can we leverage off their expertise and they, ours? Do they have specific company
contacts? Where can they be found? Will the ubiquitous pizza be served to entice you to attend? Strong possibility. Will I have to sign up on Bear Tracks? No. How can attending benefit me? It's up to you.
To answer these questions and many more, we will be scheduling during -
Mon, Nov. 26 during the break (i.e., 7:30 - 8:15) in C125 and
Thu, Dec. 6 during the break as well in the Career Center Conference Room (S420)
an informational session with the account managers.
Here's a description that Rich Wong, the financial services account manager prepared:
"The Haas Career Center staff includes 3 account managers that
can be a valuable resource to those that are exploring job or career
direction changes. Their role is to be the primary liaison for recruiters
in their specific industry sectors, being the one-stop shop point person
for companies interested in connecting with Haas MBA students. They
cover a full spectrum of responsibilities from the logistics of setting up
presentations and interviews to establishing contacts and providing
strategic guidance to recruiters (including both hiring managers as well
as University Recruiting reps within human resource departments).
Through this activity, they gain insights into their company/industry
focus that they are happy to share with Haas students, John Morel,
and the other career advisors in the Haas Career Center."
Feel free to contact them regarding questions on companies and industries
that they represent. Conversely, please provide them with any valuable
contacts that you have in current/former employers that might help them aid your
schoolmates to find employment opportunities. They are located in the Recruitment Center
(S330 by the ATM machine) and their contact information is as follows:
Mark Friedfeld - Financial Services (Investment and Commercial Banking, Real
Estate, Venture Capital)
[email protected]/510-642-6588
Jenny Rowe - Consulting, Consumer Products, Healthcare/Biotech/Medical
Devices, Educations, Not-for-Profit
[email protected]/510-643-4212
Rich Wong - Technology, Entertainment - [email protected]/510-643-4211
If you plan to attend, please respond to me directly and indicate which evening.
Best regards, Albert Demery
[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,440 |
Subject: RE: Market Repair Team Memo
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3685.
=====================================
Hi Katie:
Thought IEP folks might be interested.
Best,
Jeff
Wednesday March 14, 12:22 pm Eastern Time
US Senate rejects California utility bankruptcy measure
By Patrick Connole
WASHINGTON, March 14 (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate on Wednesday rejected a bid
to force California utility companies to repay power generators for
electricity they bought under a federal government sales order, even if
utilities go bankrupt.
In a motion on the Senate floor, lawmakers killed an amendment to a broader
bankruptcy reform bill that opponents said was a dangerous proposal that
would have opened the door to involuntary bankruptcy filings by troubled
California utilities. The utilities in question are PG&E Corp.'s (NYSE:PCG -
news) Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International's (NYSE:EIX - news)
Southern California Edison.
The amendment was sponsored by Oregon Democrat Sen. Ron Wyden, Montana
Democrat Sen. Max Baucus and Oregon Republican Sen. Gordon Smith.
Proponents said the measure would have protected the customers of the
federally-owned Bonneville Power Administration and other Northwest utilities
from unfair rate increases due to the California energy crisis.
``I don't think it's fair for consumers in other Western states to get caught
holding the bag if California utilities take our power and then run into
bankruptcy court to avoid their debts,'' Wyden said.
``The Northwest has been more than a good neighbor to California during this
crisis,'' he said.
Interestingly, the California Senate delegation was split on the matter.
Democrat Dianne Feinstein opposed the amendment, while fellow Democrat
Barbara Boxer supported it.
Feinstein called the proposal a ``dangerous amendment'' that would create two
classes of creditors and ``probably force an involuntary bankruptcy.''
The broader bankruptcy reform bill is expected to be approved by the Senate
by the end of the week.
Separately, talks between California and its three investor owned utilities
on a deal under which the state might buy their transmission assets continued
this week with no deal in sight.
The state is negotiating with PG&E and Edison, along with Sempra Energy
(NYSE:SRE - news) unit San Diego Gas and Electric.
The deals are aimed mainly at pumping money into PG&E and SoCal Edison to
keep them out of bankruptcy after they recorded about $13 billion in red ink
since last spring, paying sky-high prices for power in the wholesale market.
PG&E and SoCal Edison, under the terms of the state's disastrous experiment
with market deregulation, have been able to pass on to their retail customers
only a fraction of their power purchase costs.
=====================================
|
3,441 |
Subject: Re: A chicken in every pot
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/1119.
=====================================
How about $1 billion to build some new pipelines in California?=20
=09Jeffery Fawcett
=0911/22/2000 10:08 AM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
=09=09 cc: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
=09=09 Subject: A chicken in every pot
Hey,
Wouldn't this fix everything? What a great idea- a govenment owned=20
utility. Who in their right mind would want to give the money back to=20
taxpayers? I think Enron should cast aside its dependency on free markets,=
=20
and throw its support behind this well thought out public initiative. Let =
us=20
know how Transwestern can help!
Calif. lawmaker pushes for state energy reserve
California State Sen. Steve Peace called for the state to set aside $2=20
billion of a projected $10
billion budget surplus to create a reserve account to serve the state=01,s=
=20
energy needs.
A representative at Peace=01,s office said the senator planned the fund as =
a=20
=01&cushion=018 to help
the state bounce back from energy price shocks like those that hit it last=
=20
summer.
Peace, speaking Monday at a briefing on the upcoming state budget, suggeste=
d=20
that the
California Legislature set aside $2 billion to use at a later date. The=20
funds could be included in
the budget that Gov. Gray Davis is scheduled to announce Jan. 10. =20
Ostensibly, the government
could use the funds to purchase some of the state=01,s transmission grid an=
d=20
generation assets, or
to build new assets.
In his remarks, Peace said some of the $2 billion could be used to build a=
=20
500-MW generation
facility, which he estimates at $300 million, a peaker that could be set up=
=20
for $16 million,
or a transmission grid such as the $200 million system a California utility=
=20
has proposed for the
southern part of the state.
=01&The use of public dollars to finance development, private-public=20
partnerships, or to capitalize
publicly owned utilities are all options which California policymakers may=
=20
have to consider
if [FERC] is unable to bring wholesale energy markets under control,=018 he=
said.
Still, representatives at the senator=01,s office stressed that Peace was n=
ot=20
making any policy
decisions in his statement. Rather, a representative said, Peace was acting=
=20
in his capacity as
chairman of the Senate Budget and Fiscal Committee and setting aside funds=
=20
that can be available
for future use.
Peace=01,s initiative comes on the heels of a report by the Legislature=01,=
s=20
Legislative Analysis
Office forecasting a $10.3 billion surplus for fiscal years 2000-2002 (a $6=
.9=20
billion surplus for
2000-2001 and a $3.4 billion surplus for 2001-2002).=20
=====================================
|
3,442 |
Subject: Memorial Day in Cozumel - Redwoods: Diving
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9427.
=====================================
Hi fellow Haas students, faculty, staff:
I thought I might throw in an invitation for a short-but-sweet dive trip
down south over memorial day if you haven't any plans yet. Through
Redwoods@Haas, this May dive trip will be a 5-day, 4-night all inclusive
trip open to divers and non-divers. The objective is simply to "decompress"
after the semester: you can dive, hike/explore, lay out, read, or simply do
nothing for a long weekend.
More details to follow - and can be accessed through the Redwoods@Haas
alias, so sign up to the alias if you are interested.-jim
Haas Diving Trip to Cozumel!
May 25-30, 2001
Trip includes:
1) 5 days, 4 nights accommodations, double occupancy
2) Roundtrip airfare from LAX
3) R/T transfers airport/hotel in Cozumel
4) 4 days of 2-tank boat dives
5) Unlimited tanks for shore diving on boat diving days
6) Free use of full range of Mares Equipment
7) Free single tank night boat dive (lights not included)
8) Free u/w video of you diving in Cozumel
9) Includes use of Tanks, weights; also includes taxes, service charges
Total cost: $990.00 per person ($200 less if not diving)
Hotel: Plaza Las Glorias Hotel - right on the water, has about the largest
rooms in any hotel in Cozumel, walking distance of San Miguel, the only town
in Cozumel. The diving outfit will pick up and drop off the divers from the
Hotel on the dive days. (check out website to get a good idea on what the
hotel looks like!
http://www.cozumel.travelnotes.cc/hotels/plazalasglorias.html
Other info: 1) For days that you don't want to dive, there are
opportunities to go visit the Mayan ruins, museums, beaches, visits
to the mainland by ferry. I will get more information as questions arise.
2) Up to 10 divers per boat, but 8 is ideal.
3) Budget for food will be around $25 a day
4) Free equipment includes Masks, Snorkels, BCDs, Fins,
Wetsuits. (but I recommend bringing your own)
5) 2-tank boat dives depart hotel around 0800 and return
1300. Surface interval will be lunch on a beach somewhere
6) Depart LAX on May 25 at 7:00 am, change planes in Mexico
city and
arrive Cozumel at 3:20 pm. Depart Cozumel on May 30 at 2:35
pm, change
planes in Cancun and arrive LAX at 9:20 pm
7) We could probably set up a diving certification for
those interested in getting certified - you'll take lessons here,
and finish off your certification dives in Cozumel!
What to do:
Give a non-refundable deposit of $150.00 by April 10, 2001 to hold your
place. Payment may be made by Credit Card directly to the travel company I
am working with. Contact Jim Abilla @ [email protected] for details.
Hope you can come! - jim
=====================================
|
3,443 |
Subject: WGA price cap meeting
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5483.
=====================================
I forgot to tell you that you could find a copy of the resolution document at
www.westgov.org if you want to see it. They posted today.
----- Forwarded by Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron on 02/04/2001 11:04 PM -----
Susan M Landwehr
02/04/2001 11:03 PM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: WGA price cap meeting
Jim/Rick/Linda--I have faxed to you a copy of the resolutions that came out
of the Western Governors meeting last Friday. We were pleased to see that
there was no language endorsing price caps in the documents, nor was there
even a section suggesting that they be studied. The resolutions included
many of our suggestions (power supply contracts,rate reforms to send more
accurate price signals, demand exchanges, eliminating barriers to distributed
generation, etc) There was also a specific endosement of construction and
expansion of pipelines and electric transmission.
The Thursday evening keynote by Bennett Johnston was typical old fox
Louisiana style rhetoric saying that even though price caps didn't work,
gee...just this one time, they should be instituted for just the short term
(his client is SoCalEd). The morning session started off rocky, with way too
much discussion about price caps or cost plus ratemaking being a good idea.
Mid way thru the program Gov Kempthorne affirmatively stated that he did not
agree with price caps and that actually started the discussion back on the
right road. The Governors met in closed session at noon and then later in
the day, and ultimately there were enough Republican votes to make sure that
price caps were not endorsed.
DOE secretary Abraham was not particularly vocal during his time on the
panel, but did give good anti price cap interviews with the press later. And
good old market man Curt Hebert had some very strong statements against price
caps. His colleagues Massey and Breathitt were both there, and did not echo
the same sentiments!
Paul and I will be talking in the next few days to plan our next strategy
with this group...it will need some continued hand holding and work. Please
feel free to call either of us if you would like more specific info. Please
also forward on to whoever in your group I neglected to copy or would have an
interest.. THANKS to all who helped us get ready for this meeting.
=====================================
|
3,444 |
Subject: FW: first message not quite complete
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10633.
=====================================
May be of interest to your biz dev efforts.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/04/2001 12:10 PM -----
=09"Laura Goldseth" <[email protected]>
=0904/04/2001 12:00 PM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: <[email protected]>
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: FW: first message not quite complete
SVMG MEMBERS...please find below information pertaining to a PIBA Product
Strategies Meeting. Kathleen at PIBA can offer SVMG members a 50% discount
if they aren't PIBA members already. Her contact information is at the ver=
y
end of the text. This may be something of interest. Check it out. Laura
***************************************************************************=
*
******************
Join PIBA's EHS Product Strategies Committee meeting, 8:30am-10:30am
Thursday morning, April 5, 2001, at Agilent Technologies, 395 Page Mill
Road, Palo Alto - directions at <http://www.piba.org> Registration
7:50am-8:25am.
Speakers: Michael Cox, Agilent Technologies; Elizabeth Zimmermann, IBM;
Chris Hazen, ERM; and David Monzma of BSR
Since Agenda 21 pronounced the need for supply chain management in
Chapter 4, organizations have labored to bring their suppliers to heel
in terms of environmental risk and management. Now, we are turning the
corner to second-generation SM tools. Agilent=01,s best-in-class program
is a good example of these tools, leveraging other supplier
qualification considerations and ease of management for the customer.
Join PIBA for an exciting discussion concerning managing EHS in the
supply chain. This is an area of interest to any company that depends
primarily on suppliers for products and operations. Michael Cox, who
manages the supply-chain EHS management program for Agilent
Technologies, will lead a participatory discussion concerning
supply-chain EHS practices and benefits. Michael believes that this is
an area of growth opportunity for EHS professionals. =01&The supply chain
brings together a huge number of EHS issues and opportunities under one
roof. Integrating EHS into the chain should be a top priority for any
Fortune 500 company.=018 Michael will discuss what Agilent is doing to
take an integrated approach to this issue and to find hidden value and
opportunity. Although the perspective will be electronics
manufacturing, any company that uses suppliers will benefit from the
discussion.
This will be a fast paced and exciting morning. A 30-minute discussion
will follow the presentations. So that each speaker has use of allotted
presentation time this meeting will start on time.
PIBA Members free
Non members 95.00
RSVP to Kathleen at PIBA at 650/965-2436 or [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,445 |
Subject: =?ANSI_X3.4-1968?Q?Washington=01,s_Energy_Supply_Order_No._01-02?=
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4911.
=====================================
This order may be an opportunity to get additional back-up generation quick=
ly=20
installed at customer's facilities in WA State. It is only applicable for=
=20
onsight energy use - not selling to the grid.
On January 29, 2001 Governor Gary Locke signed Energy Supply Order No. 01-0=
2,=20
suspending regulations pertaining to construction and portable source=20
requirements of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 173-400-110) and=20
local air pollution control authority regulations adopted under RCW 70.94.1=
52=20
for 30 days. The 30 days suspension was granted to allow temporary electri=
c=20
generators that may be a major source of air pollution to be installed or=
=20
constructed by utilities and other users of electricity without receiving a=
=20
construction approval from the state. The order allows non-utilities to=20
generate the electricity to offset their existing demand. However,=20
non-utilities cannot sell the generated electricity. The purpose of the=20
Order was to get sources generating electricity on line immediately. The=
=20
order has now been extended to March 27, 2001 and is known as =01&Energy Su=
pply=20
Order No. 01-04.=018 It is likely the extension will continue.=20
The basic differences between this Energy Order and a regular plan approval=
=20
process is
1. Facility is allowed to operate a generator immediately without prior=20
construction approval. However, the facility has to meet the same=20
requirements as they would if they were applying for a regular construction=
=20
approval and operating permit.
2. No control device is required on the source. Under the Order, Washingto=
n=20
Department of Ecology will allow a source to operate without control on a=
=20
temporary basis. They are thinking of defining =01&temporary=018 as less t=
han six=20
months. After that the source must install a control device. It is unclea=
r=20
if a construction plan approval will be required to install the control=20
device at that time. =20
3. The facility must obtain offsets or have a plan indicating how they are=
=20
going to get offsets in the Energy Alert notification to the Department. =
=20
There must be enough emission offsets to cover the operating time it would=
=20
normally take to receive a plan approval from the Department. The normal=
=20
time frame to receive a plan approval from the Department is approximately=
=20
one month. =20
The only advantage with the Order is that a source can operate immediately=
=20
and without control device on a temporary basis as long as they follow all=
=20
the requirements listed. =20
Mary Schoen
Environmental Strategies
Enron Corp
713-345-7422
=====================================
|
3,446 |
Subject: FW: Bush's Inaugural Speech
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3089.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/Enron Communications on 11/06/00 04:48 PM
-----
Wayne Gardner
11/05/00 02:28 PM
To: Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lara
Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: FW: Bush's Inaugural Speech
W. Wayne Gardner
Enron Broadband Services
1400 Smith Street
Houston, TX 77002-7361
Phone: 713 853 3547
Fax: 713 646 2532
----- Forwarded by Wayne Gardner/Enron Communications on 05/11/2000 14:31
-----
[email protected]
05/11/2000 12:17
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Wayne
Gardner/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: FW: Bush's Inaugural Speech
-----Original Message-----
From: ROADwomen [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2000 10:43 AM
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Subject: Bush's Inaugural Speech
From our buddy Jeffrey in Indiana.
Bush's Inaugural Speech
(to the tune of "What a Wonderful World This Will Be" by Sam Cooke)
Don't know much about history
Don't know much foreign policy
Don't remember how I got through school
I'm sure I didn't break the rules
But what's it matter 'cause my granny says
"Boy, if you want to you can be the prez
And what a wonderful world this will be"
Don't know much about the women's vote
Don't know much about the bill I wrote
Don't know much about the foreign vets
I've never voted for 'em yet
But I do know if your dad tries hard
He can get you in the National Guard
And what a wonderful place that can be
Now I never claimed to be an A student
But what's wrong with C's?
And maybe by knowing the names of my cabinet
I can win their love for me
Don't know much about air pollution
Don't know much about the constitution
Don't know much about th' economy
It never much affected me
But there's one thing that I know for sure
If the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor
What a wonderful world this will be
Don't know much about the national debt
I've never had to pay one yet
If we need to we can sell the States
To the Japanese at discount rates
But I do know if things get bad
Dick and I can always call my dad
And what a wonderful world this will be.
Still laughing and praying he never gets to give it!
Jeffrey
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"What do they think Social Security is,
some kind of federal program?"
- George W. 11/1/00 -- are we sure he is sober? ;-)
=====================================
|
3,447 |
Subject: Re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4464.
=====================================
Attached is the latest version of the model to illustrate the portfolio
benchmark concept. Alan, I have included PG&E's QF resources using the data
from Suzy. If anyone has questions please call, else we will chat at 3:00.
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 12/11/2000 10:20 AM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
The votes have been counted (kidding), and the call will take place today at
3 PM PST. Call-in number to follow.
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 10:19 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/07/2000 12:13 PM
To: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
Folks:
The "subcommittee" I've referenced that's trying to come up with a solution
to California's train wreck is moving very quickly. The group's shooting to
have a first cut at a "straw person" proposal sketched out by end of next
week. The group's meeting on Tuesday to continue to bounce around ideas.
I'd like to try to have an internal call on Monday at either 10 AM (PST) or
3 PM (PST) to pin down at least a vaguely detailed conceptual framework that
I can propose to the subcommittee on Tuesday. The agenda items for the
internal meeting are:
Finalize proposal for benchmark(s) for utility procurement.
Goal: increase utility willingness to enter into forward contracts by
replacing PUC after-the-fact "reasonableness" review with a benchmark. (Been
working the Portland desk on a "portfolio benchmark" concept.)
Determine our view of how to treat term contracts w.r.t. the PX credit, i.e.,
should those contracts be disclosed to the market, or should PUC keep them
confidential, calculate the PX credit behind closed doors, and publish the
credit ex poste? The PX credit depends on the overall utility portfolio, not
just the PX price.
Let me know if 10 AM or 3 PM (PST) works better.
Harry: I'll assume that you'll contact the folks from EES that need to
participate.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,448 |
Subject: Metering Issues
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1090.
=====================================
Feedback below on metering issues raised by the UDCs. The list is a high
level representation of some of the issues resulting from the 6/01
re-Dasring process, some of which have since been resolved. For
clarification, I have added notes (in blue) from a review of the issues
with Beth Apollo and Dionn Williams.
Please call me at 713.822.3753 if you need additional input.
Maggie Brown
----- Forwarded by Margaret Brown/TMG/CSC on 12/21/01 10:31 AM -----
Margaret
Brown To: [email protected]
/TMG/CSC cc: Teresa D Carroll-Childers/TMG/CSC@CSC, Dionne L
Williams/TMG/CSC@CSC, Patricia G Priestley/TMG/CSC@CSC
12/21/01 Subject: Metering Issues
08:53 AM
Current metering issues provided by Dionne Williams:
Meters installed without phone lines per Enron's direction (thus unable to
read) -- focus was on getting meters installed, will quantify by 1/1/02
(est. ~200 at this time)
Posting data on account numbers that maybe different than what the UDC
displays (causing MADENs) -- has been resolved
Inability to respond to MADENs in a timely manner -- MADEN is a
notification of a problem, will quantify by 1/1/02 (est. increase from 3 to
~100) , have increased staff to address workload increase.
Meter Installations taking priority over meter maintenance (per Enron's
direction initially. This was changed first of November, thus Mario
dedicated one of his installers for maintenance. However, he is still
unable to respond to the maintenance calls in a timely manner)
Recap of Teressa Carroll-Childer's discussion with Jeff Dasovich at noon
yesterday:
Jeff was getting response back from the UDCs re metering issues
He was going to contact Dionne Williams directly to obtain feedback in
order to respond (Dionne has not heard from him)
Jeff was going to follow up with the UDCs yesterday
Let me know if we can do anything else to assist at this time.
=====================================
|
3,449 |
Subject: Re: Initial memo on California study proposal
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/796.
=====================================
Rick, et al --
I don't know if we need to do this study and the work that Seabron and LECG
would be doing. Maybe we incorporate these guys into the mix during the work
up of the analysis.
I think that we need to make sure that we have the right questions to ask. I
will get with Jeff Dasovich and Joe Hartsoe and Mary Hain to make sure that
we (1) have the right questions and (2) have the right parties answering the
questions. Then let's look at our current resources and go outside only if
necessary.
Jim
Richard Shapiro
08/27/2000 11:39 AM
To: Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff
Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
Subject: Re: Initial memo on California study proposal
where are we on this? Jim- How does this square w/ Seabron's work? Is there a
way to marry the two?
Rob Bradley@ENRON
08/18/2000 05:10 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES
cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff
Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
Subject: Re: Initial memo on California study proposal
Robert Michaels is proposing a consultant study looking at the California
electricity chaos (see attached). It is roughly a $100,000 study before
printing and distribution costs with a delivery date of December 1. The
study would also involve Ken Malloy's Center for the Advancement of Energy
Markets.
I think Robert would do a good job but raise these issues:
1) This is expensive. It is at consultant rates and is not an academic study
where a think tank can get the professors to do something at less cost
2) Malloy is pretty heavy into this at a cost of $14,400 of about 40% of
Michaels. His NARUC connections are very important, and we would want him on
the popularization side, but this is too much.
3) The study might need a co-author with lots of academic credibility to join
Robert as good as he is.
I'm glad that we have this proposal--it will force us to think about what we
want, who does it, and how it should be distributed. We should also think
about how much industry money we could gather to fund such an effort (it
should be large given the stakes).
Can you provide your impressions so I can get back to Robert?
- Rob
Robert Michaels <[email protected]> on 08/18/2000 03:34:12 PM
Please respond to [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Initial memo on California study proposal
All --
Here's the memo I said you'd have today, and a preliminary budgeting
sheet. Gimme a call as soon as is reasonably possible.
Thanx,
RM
- 818 Proposal Memo.doc
- 818 Malloy California Report (Michaels).xls
=====================================
|
3,450 |
Subject: RE: Call Regarding Prehearing Conference on Our Negative CTC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1508.
=====================================
I'm concerned about the 2nd bullet. We've been taking the position that we don't want this "payment of PX credit" issue in this proceeding -- the "free-for-all" proceeding. Have we changed our position? If not, I am concerned that Edison will either state directly or give the impression that it's part of the Barnett proceeding.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mellencamp, Lisa
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:09 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Williams, Robert C.; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
Cc: Steffes, James D.; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mara, Susan
Subject: RE: Call Regarding Prehearing Conference on Our Negative CTC complaint
ok
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 1:06 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Williams, Robert C.; '[email protected]'; Mellencamp, Lisa; '[email protected]'
Cc: Steffes, James D.; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mara, Susan
Subject: RE: Call Regarding Prehearing Conference on Our Negative CTC complaint
OK. Haven't heard back from Bob, but we may be able to avoid the call. Mike Day got in touch with Edison's attorney this morning and here's the end result.
Edison has agreed to tell the judge on the 7th that, with respect to the complaints we've filed, they agree to take them off calendar until and unless parties ask to put them back on calendar.
Edison will take the view that the proceedings underway at the commission (and presumably attempts to "settle" with parties) will resolve the issues in the complaint.
The assumption from out end is that the status quo remains intact. That is, we will continue to pay the Commission, not Edison, for T&D charges during the "time out" on our complaints.
Mike and Jeanne will make sure that this critical piece, i.e., that we continue to place payments in escrow, will remain intact as part of the "time out." If it turns out there are any doubts about this aspect, we'll likely need regroup and reconsider our options.
If anyone has any questions or concerns please speak up, and/or if folks would still like to have a very brief call to discuss, we can do that and ensure that Bob is kept in the loop and can weigh in when he returns.
Comments/thoughts?
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:30 AM
To: Williams, Robert C.; '[email protected]'; Mellencamp, Lisa
Subject: Call Regarding Prehearing Conference on Our Negative CTC complaint
Bob's secretary called to tell me that Bob's at a doctor's appt and will be back in the office around noon Houston time. We'll shoot for around noon CST to have the call. I'll conference folks in from my phone.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,451 |
Subject: Re:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4693.
=====================================
No problem. Let's talk. I'm really comfortably having you and me and your
mom and keith talk about. I'm very interested in buying Jay's property, but
I don't even the details yet. Here's my suggestion. If they want to come up
that bad, they should. My agent is a very cool person up there. Here name
is Sharon Burningham. She is with Coldwell Banker. Her number is
707.884.5270. ext. 308. You should feel free to tell your mom that Prentice
and I have always have the intention of buying Jay's place, and we've had a
sort of unspoken agreement that he'd give us the first "head's up" when he
decided to sell. To be honest, we didn't expect it to be this quick, but
hey, it is what it is. You can also tell your mom that I'm very happy to
talk about partnering with her. But it's WAY to early right now. As we
discussed, I need to spend some time with Jay---the other very important
thing for me is that Jay's a very good friend, and I want to protect that,
too. In the meantime, I think that it would be great for your mom and Keith
to have Sharon take them around and show them some killer
million--plus--dollar homes and have some fun cruising around and seeing what
the area has to offer. I'm real happy to call Sharon, too. That sound like
a plan? Where can I call you?
Best,
Jeff
"Scott Laughlin" <[email protected]>
05/21/2001 02:38 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject:
Dude,
I just talked to my mom, and they are chomping at the bit, if that's the
right expression. My mom even wants to come up Wed and stay til Thurs night!
I told her to chill a bit, that she might not be able to see Jay's property.
She still wants to come up, so I told her we might be able to look at some
other stuff, so do you think I should talk to an agent about this? They are
damn excited, and I don't really know how to calm them down. They went to
bookstores and looked at pictures of the area. They are probably talking
about it all the time. I tell you this so you know what I'm dealing with
over here. She also asked me if you were thinking of buying it, and I told
her I wasn't sure. Do you want me to tell her that you're thinking about it?
I know they'd totally respect your position, if we told them that. I'm not
sure I even want them to come up this week, but they are so emphatic that
it'd be nothing less than an insult to tell them not to. Anyway, give me
some advise on this matter, please.
Cheers!
Scott
Also, thanks for giving Cameron your car; I know she's psyched.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
=====================================
|
3,452 |
Subject: Re: Master Purchase and Sale Agreement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/610.
=====================================
Steve:
Here's a word version of the MSA. Sorry for the delay. Could you make
changes in strike-out-underline format and email back to me when you're
done? Thanks a million.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 10/11/2000 04:56 PM -----
Donald Lassere@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
10/11/2000 03:58 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Master Purchase and Sale Agreement
Jeff,
Attached is "a" word version of the Master Purchase and Sale Agreement.
Although it says "sample" it is identical to the version that we are
currently using. If you have any questions, please call me on 713-853-6341.
Best regards,
Donald
----- Forwarded by Donald Lassere/Enron Communications on 10/14/00 03:57 PM
-----
Marie Heard
10/11/00 02:01 PM
To: Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: Re: Master Purchase and Sale Agreement
Here it is!
Marie Heard
Senior Legal Specialist
Enron Broadband Services
Phone: (713) 853-3907
Fax: (713) 646-8537
[email protected]
Donald Lassere
10/11/00 09:25 AM
To: Marie Heard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: Re: Master Purchase and Sale Agreement
Marie,
Do we have a MS-Word version of the Master Bandwidth Purchase and Sale
Agreement? If we do, could you send it to me? Thanks.
Donald
Marie Heard
10/11/00 08:56 AM
To: Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
Subject: Master Purchase and Sale Agreement
Donald,
Attached is the latest form Master Bandwidth Purchase and Sale Agreement. If
you need copies of any of our documents in the future, just give me a call
and I can send them to you.
Marie
Marie Heard
Senior Legal Specialist
Enron Broadband Services
Phone: (713) 853-3907
Fax: (713) 646-8537
[email protected]
----- Forwarded by Marie Heard/Enron Communications on 10/11/00 08:59 AM -----
Cynthia Harkness
10/10/00 06:37 PM
To: Marie Heard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject:
Could you take care of this??? Thanks!
Cynthia
----- Forwarded by Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications on 10/10/00 06:39 PM
-----
Donald Lassere
10/13/00 04:17 PM
To: Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject:
Cynthia,
I have come by your office several times and continue to miss you. So, I have
to result to the "dreaded e-mail" :) Could you send me the latest version of
the Master P&S Agreement? Many thanks.
Regards,
Donald
PS: When you get a minute, give me a call so that we can chat.
x36341
=====================================
|
3,453 |
Subject: CSO - Next Week's High-Tech Recruiting Activities
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2794.
=====================================
Next week is light on high-tech recruiting activities.
Brience will be holding an info session on Thursday, Nov 2nd at 12:30
at the Faculty Club in advance of their interviews. See the invitation below
and attached flyer for more details.
Please sign up on BearTracks if you plan to attend.
Thanks,
Rich
***************************************************************************
BRIENCE INFORMATION SESSION:
Date: Thursday, November 2.
Time: 12:30pm
Location: Faculty Club
Food will be served! There will be a raffle for a Palm VIIx. Please join us!
Brience was conceptualized in late 1999, and launched in March 2000 to
provide businesses with the flexibility, agility and power to meet the
challenge of mobile eBusiness. While working together at KPMG Consulting,
founders Rod McGeary, Keyur Patel, Arvin Babu and Joni Kahn had helped
countless clients including Cisco, Macromedia, Netscape, Sears, Bally's,
Bank of America, Fleet, Microsoft, and JP Morgan implement eBusiness
infrastructures to meet constantly changing market conditions and customer
demands.
The challenge they saw moving forward was to create a flexible, adaptive
approach that would meet the needs of ensuing generations of eBusiness:
generations faced with myriad devices, diverse content, the convergence of
back-end systems with customer facing operations, and an emphasis on
customization. Brience is the answer to that challenge.
Headquartered in San Francisco, Brience today has nearly 200 employees
worldwide in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlanta, New York, Dallas, Orlando,
Brazil and Armenia, and is still growing. The company received the largest
initial round of funding in history, with $200M from GTCR Golder Rauner
(Chicago) and Greylock (Boston) and has achieved critical milestones at a
dramatic rate: signing its first Global 1000 customer within its first month
of operation, completing beta product development in four months, and fully
staffing each and every one of its core management roles.
Brience provides the universal delivery platform for the Adaptive Web,
offering solutions that let companies easily extend their e-Business reach
to customers and employees and allow them to take advantage of new
Web-enabled business opportunities. Brience solutions are based on open,
global standards, allowing businesses to adapt their infrastructures to
changing market conditions quickly and with minimal risk. Through its
relationships with the leading visionaries of the Internet Infrastructure,
Brience ensures its customers have access to the best wireless and broadband
solutions available from the companies that are driving the future of
e-Business.
- Brience Flyer.doc
=====================================
|
3,454 |
Subject: Re: FW: Tech. Req. for Single & 3 Phase, 8-15-00.DOC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/92.
=====================================
Becky - I will read tonight, please call me tomorrow morning to dsicuss. I
will be in by 7 am (853-4350).
Thanks - Jeff
Becky L Merola
08/24/2000 10:07 AM
To: Tom Hoatson/HOU/EES@EES, Robin Kittel/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES
cc: [email protected], Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: FW: Tech. Req. for Single & 3 Phase, 8-15-00.DOC
Hi Folks:
For those of you who have more technical expertise in electricity, if you
could look at the attached document and provide me with your comments by
August 29th it would be greatly appreciated. If there is anyone else that
you feel may be of assistance in this matter please don't hesitate to forward
this document. Thank you for your help.
---------------------- Forwarded by Becky L Merola/DUB/EES on 08/24/2000
10:56 AM ---------------------------
"Taft, Sheldon A." <[email protected]> on 08/24/2000 09:47:18 AM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,
"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc: "Petricoff, M. Howard" <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Tech. Req. for Single & 3 Phase, 8-15-00.DOC
Here are the Technical Requirements proposed by the utilities at the August
23 PUCO Workshop on Interconnection. Please have your technical people
review these and share with us any issues or problems that marketers would
have with them. We will need to identify these issues and problems and to
propose alternatives before the next workshop meeting on August 30.
-----Original Message-----
From: Colbert, Paul [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 10:40 AM
To: Taft, Sheldon A.
Subject: Tech. Req. for Single & 3 Phase, 8-15-00.DOC
<<Tech. Req. for Single & 3 Phase, 8-15-00.DOC>> Here it is. Thank you.
From the law offices of Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If
you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communications
through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
________________________________________________________________________
- Tech. Req. for Single & 3 Phase, 8-15-00.DOC
=====================================
|
3,455 |
Subject: End of Year - Instructor Evaluations
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11944.
=====================================
Dear fellow students,
As classes are about to end for the semester, we will be asked to complete
Instructor Evaluations Forms for each class taken. The evaluations are one
of the most effective tools we have as students to ensure the quality of
instruction remains high and our tuition dollars are used effectively. Both
the Student Advisory Committee and the Evening MBA Association work hard to
improve the program but our efforts become difficult when those professors
whom students felt were not up to par receive high marks.
The evaluations are used in deciding whether to invite instructors back to
the program. Club 6 is an elite group of professors that have received a
median evaluation of 6.0 or better. Students should consider a rating of 6
as a sign of an outstanding teacher. This will allow us to truly reward and
distinguish the professors that stand out.
Please keep the following in mind when considering the Instructor Evaluation
Forms.
1. Courses taught by multiple professors require multiple evaluations. Not
all instructors add the same value and we should recognize this. Please
differentiate your evaluations being specific about each professor and
his/her specific strenghts and weaknesses.
2. Some classes are more 'fun' than others. Please keep in mind that the
form clearly distingushes between the course strenghts and the instructor's
effectiveness in teaching the course. While some classes are not so popular,
the professors teaching those courses might be truly outstanding.
3. Many people reported to us that they did not have a reference scale to
guide them in making evaluation decisions. Keep in mind that 6 is considered
an above average performanace. The following is the reference scale provided
a while back. Please bring it to class or keep it in mind when evaluating
the faculty.
1 - Soo bad, it's less than 2
2 - So bad, it's less than 3
3 - Class had many critical faults. This instructor should not be
invited again unless major changes are made
4 - Class had some critical shortcomings, this instructor should be
invited again after some adjustments
5 - A good course, instructor in line with expectation for HAAS
instructors
6 - Excellent course, instructor generally superior to MOST other
instructors previously had
7 - Outstanding/walks on water
4. For your reference, the following is a link to the article in HaasNews
announcing the members if this elite club for the Fall 2000 semester.
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/groups/newspubs/haasnews/archives/hn031901.html
On behalf of the EvMBAA Board of Directors, Thanks for your help in making
the Haas Evening MBA program the best it can be.
Ken Bruce
President, EvMBAA
=====================================
|
3,456 |
Subject: Re: strategy for natural gas issues
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11040.
=====================================
I think that Margaret's analysis may cover much of this (not the Enron
specific action).
Jim
Janel Guerrero
04/03/2001 01:07 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: strategy for natural gas issues
Guys,
Our friends at Environmental and Energy Analysis sent this email around
regarding the gas shortage in CA. They might be useful for us in terms of
analysis, prepartion etc. Or is MRW already providing us with this type of
assistance?
---------------------- Forwarded by Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron on 04/03/2001
01:04 PM ---------------------------
"Joel Bluestein" <[email protected]> on 04/03/2001 10:05:24 AM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: fuel switching in california
besides electricity, there is an equal and related upcoming
meltdown on gas in california. our assessment is that the current
high prices are largely a result of intrastate constraints that will be
exacerbated as gas use for power generation increases. for this
summer it is possible that there will be generating constraints due
to inadequate gas delivery capacity. a more likely outcome is that
power generators will get the gas they need at the expense of
storage injection for winter heating load. this will create supply
problems and higher residential gas problems next winter. summer
prices for industrial gas users will also be higher.
a possible solution is to take advantage of fuel switching. many of
the california plants are old oil/gas plants and have the capacity to
switch fuels. they are currently limited by environmental limits. it
might be in california's broader interests to allow some flexibility on
switching this summer to ensure power reliability and adequate gas
storage for the winter.
reasons for possible interest for enron - better power reliability this
summer, possible gas/oil trading opportunities, emissions trading
opportunities?, other?
since oil is much cheaper than the currently high california gas
prices, this option would also increase the profitability of the plants
that switch fuels. it's not clear whether this helps Enron. one
option would be to require very clean oil since the market will bear
significant cost.
there are a few questions related to this: how tight will gas be this
summer? what are the likely impacts without switching? are the
plants still oil-capable?
let me know if this is something you are interested in discussing.
Joel Bluestein
Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.
Phone 703-528-1900
Fax 703-528-5106
=====================================
|
3,457 |
Subject: Gas Daily: Breathitt wants more attention on Calif. gas
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10793.
=====================================
From today's Gas Daily:
***Breathitt wants more attention on Calif. gas
Although the energy spotlight has been on California's
electricity crisis, the number of California gas issues at FERC is
continually increasing, signaling the need to focus on the gas side
of the equation, a FERC commissioner said last week.
"[T]here is volatility in the gas markets as well as the electric
markets," FERC Commissioner Linda Breathitt said at the American
Gas Association's FERC Natural Gas Regulatory and Market Issues
Seminar last week in Washington, D.C. And the cost of gas, she said,
is the component that has the biggest influence on the cost of
electric generation.
Two issues pending at FERC are whether to re-impose price caps
on secondary market transactions and whether to cap prices on
gas sales, Breathitt said.
In addition, FERC recently issued an order to help remove
obstacles to increased energy supplies into the West (GD 3/15). In
the order, FERC sought comments on the need to provide rate
incentives for projects that would make additional capacity
available by this summer on constrained pipeline systems. "I believe
that if the commission does provide incentives, we should be very
precise regarding the activity we are encouraging and the incentives
we will be willing to consider, if at all," Breathitt said.
The commissioner also voiced concern over a California issue
that sits at the state level -- intrastate pipeline facilities.
California, she said, needs to assess whether its intrastate system
is adequate to take gas from the border to its market. "I am
worried that where there is insufficient takeaway capacity, FERC's
actions to increase capacity to the border may result in problems,
such as prorationing," Breathitt said.
Meanwhile, Breathitt suggested local distribution companies in
California need the ability to use risk management tools. Policies
should be in place to give gas buyers an incentive to use such
tools, including price hedging and the efficient use of storage, she
said.
But regulators should be careful in noting the difference
between hedging to reduce exposure to price volatility and what
Breathitt called "mere speculating." While hedging can be used to
decrease uncertainty, speculating to beat the market can actually
increase the possibility of risk, she said.
Regulators in California and other states should look into the
benefits of reducing gas buyers' dependence on the spot market. "A
balanced portfolio of long- and short-term contracts makes a great
deal of sense when spot prices are at the extreme levels of the past
year," she said. CD
=====================================
|
3,458 |
Subject: Re: Developing Enron Position on DG Issues for Use in California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/distributed_generation/28.
=====================================
Yes, I would like to be apart of any meeting that covers DG from the
regulatory side. My comments would most likely focus on the interconnection
issues, rather than the who the competitors should or shouldn't be.
Joe Graham
Dennis Benevides
01/07/2000 03:53 PM
To: Joseph Graham/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Developing Enron Position on DG Issues for Use in California
any comments?
---------------------- Forwarded by Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES on 01/07/2000
03:49 PM ---------------------------
Jeff Dasovich on 01/07/2000 02:30:22 PM
To: [email protected], Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Robert
Frank/HOU/EES@EES, Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Dennis
Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L
Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Sandi Mccubbin, Paul Kaufman@EES, Susan M
Landwehr/HOU/EES@EES, Jay Zoellner/Western Region/The Bentley
Company@Exchange, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES,
Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Developing Enron Position on DG Issues for Use in California
Please forward this along to anyone else whom you feel needs to be included.
We recently discussed having a meeting in Houston to hammer out the Company's
position on issues related to distributed generation. Would be useful to
have that meeting as soon as we can, since we'll need to let the California
Commission know our position on the following issues by February 1st:
Utility participation in DG--should utilities participate?--(and implications
of such on market power, interconnection, safety & reliability, rate design
and cost allocation).
Whether net metering should be expanded and applied to all DG.
Consumer education about the availability of DG. Is there a need for it?
Suggestions for outreach that state government could offer to local
governments with the intent of helping locals streamline environmental review
of DG.
In addition, we'll need to express our view on the following issues by March
17th:
Should the utility be required to establish an unbundled distribution
wheeling tariff?
Whether a DG selling "excess power" to the grid is a "public utility" in
California.
Whether the CPUC or FERC has jurisdiction over sales of "excess power."
Does California need to establish scheduling and dispatch protocols to
support DG sales of "excess power?"
What concerns, if any, should California have with respect to DG and the
possibility of locational market power?
What should rates look like for standby charges, bypass charges, stranded
costs? Is there a role for PBR?
Is it possible to have the meeting next week? I can be in Houston on
Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,459 |
Subject: VentureWire Professional trial ends this week
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/697.
=====================================
VentureWire Professional <http://professional.venturewire.com/images/VWPro_lin3.gif>
Dear Jeffrey:
This is a quick follow up to our e-mails from last week, and a note about another feature you might find useful.
In addition to delivering comprehensive venture-captial news to you every morning, the VentureWire Professional web sites enables you to quickly look at each day's deals and developments in 17 focused industry sectors.
Want to know what's happening in biotech <http://professional.venturewire.com/category.asp?mid=11> ? in semiconduct or <http://professional.venturewire.com/category.asp?mid=12> investing? Who are the new players in telecom <http://professional.venturewire.com/category.asp?mid=3>? Any new optical <http://professional.venturewire.com/category.asp?mid=13> investments or acquisitions today? How's the Internet services <http://professional.venturewire.com/category.asp?mid=7> sector faring, of late? What's happening with venture-backed enterprise software <http://professional.venturewire.com/category.asp?mid=1> firms?
If you haven't done so already, you can retrieve your temporary login and password to the site here <http://professional.venturewire.com/m_pass.asp>.
All of these tools are available anytime, from anywhere, to VentureWire Professional subscribers. Other resources include our exclusive VentureWire Index <http://professional.venturewire.com/index.asp> for each sector and the names of the funds <http://professional.venturewire.com/topinvestors.asp> that are doing the most deals with the companies you follow.
If you're looking for new deals or tracking a sector, you can't find a better, more timely source of information.
This is the final week of your free, no-risk trial to the market's most current, comprehensive and user-friendly database of deal news.
The 20% charter discount is available for a limited time only.
Subscribe now <http://professional.venturewire.com/prosub.asp>!
Thank You.
Brian O'Connell
Publisher
VentureWire Professional <http://professional.venturewire.com/m2_professional.asp> | VentureWire Alert <http://professional.venturewire.com/m2_alert.asp> | VentureWire People <http://professional.venturewire.com/m2_people.asp> | VentureWire Events <http://events.venturewire.com>
If you'd prefer not to receive such messages from us, click here <http://venturewire.com/[email protected]>.
you can find out more about group subscription rates here <http://professional.venturewire.com/groupsub.asp> or call us at 1-800-664-9995
VentureWire and VentureWire Professional are trademarks and service marks of Technologic Partners
?2001 Technologic Partners
=====================================
|
3,460 |
Subject: RE: ICSC Information
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Jeff', 'Dasovich', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/1367.
=====================================
Thanks very much for your help on this.
-----Original Message-----
From: Alamo, Joseph
Sent: Thu 10/4/2001 5:47 PM
To: 'Ashley Kasischke/HOU/EES@EES'
Cc: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: ICSC Information
Ashley,
I got the faxes!
Thanks so much and I will make sure Jeff receives all the info!
Thanks again for all your help,
Joseph Alamo
Sr. Administrative Assistant
Global Government Affairs
ph. (415) 782-7841
fax (415) 782-7854
e-mail: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Kasischke, Ashley On Behalf Of Ashley Kasischke/HOU/EES@EES
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 1:13 PM
To: Alamo, Joseph
Cc: Malone, Laurie; Glasin, Shirleen
Subject: RE: ICSC Information
I just sent you a fax of the information which I currently have in my possession regarding the ICSC Law Conference. I have a call into Shirleen Glasin (the individual here in Houston who is putting together the PowerPoint Presentation for Laurie) to see if there has been any discussions regarding Jeff's portion of the presentation; i.e., whether there would only be one PowerPoint Presentation prepared wherein Laurie would present her portion of the discussion and then Jeff would pick up and finish with the deregulation portion of the discussion,, or if there would be two separate presentations prepared all together. I have scheduled a meeting between Laurie and Shirleen for next Wednesday, October 10, 2001 at 2:00 p.m. (CST) to discuss the presentation(s). It would probably be beneficial for Jeff to attend this meeting via telephone if he is available to do so.
From: Joseph Alamo/ENRON@enronXgate on 10/04/2001 02:01 PM
To: "Ashley Kasischke/HOU/EES@EES" <[email protected]>@SMTP@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: RE: ICSC Information
no worries! I can call her...as a matter of fact, I did but hung up because I had to take another call!
You're so kind!
Thanks,
Joseph Alamo
Sr. Administrative Assistant
Global Government Affairs
ph. (415) 782-7841
fax (415) 782-7854
e-mail: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Kasischke, Ashley On Behalf Of Ashley Kasischke/HOU/EES@EES
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:58 AM
To: Alamo, Joseph
Cc: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: ICSC Information
I have not forgot about you . . . I have placed a call to Jennifer Degnan asking her to forward me the forms which you would need to fill out (trying to save you some trouble since you have just kind of been thrown into this). I will fax them as soon as I get them. I have already received a copy of the hotel reservations form from ICSC travel.
=====================================
|
3,461 |
Subject: 2001 UC-Berkeley Business Plan Competition WINNERS
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3904.
=====================================
Dear Haas Community,
The 2001 UC-Berkeley Business Plan Competition Organizing Committee wants t=
o=20
share a little joy with everyone at Haas:
Last night's Final Event completed this year's Competition with RAPT=20
Technologies walking away with both the $50,000 first prize and the $5,000=
=20
People's Choice Award (as voted on by the audience). RAPT has developed a=
=20
dramatically faster and more cost-effective technology for etching and=20
polishing optical and semiconductor materials.=20
Aprotea Biochips earned $25,000 for second place. Aprotea developed a=20
patent-pending biochip for parallel analysis of 100 to 10,000 protein=20
samples, and is designed to be bio-compatible with virtually all proteins a=
nd=20
capture agent libraries.=20
TruVideo rounded out the top three with a $10,000 prize. They offer superio=
r=20
digital image quality over broadband compared to existing technologies. The=
=20
company intends to take advantage of the convergence of wireless technology=
=20
and the Internet to become the standard video platform for the emerging=20
web-enabled wireless device market.=20
We would like to extend our congratulations, once again, to everyone who=20
participated, especially the hard-working entrepreneurs who made this year'=
s=20
competition such a success. The six teams that made the Finals are listed=
=20
below. (Take note First Years: there are a lot of upperclassmen in the list=
.=20
We hope to be reading your names listed here next year)
Best regards,
The 2001 Berkeley Business Plan Competition Organizing Committee
2001 Berkeley Business Plan Contest Winners and Finalists
First Place ($50,000): RAPT Technologies
Peter Fiske MBA 2002
Jeff Carr Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Mona Alves Founder, President and CEO, CHAT Communication Services
Second Place ($25,000): Aprotea
Robert Otillar PhD Candidate, UCSF
Thomas McVey - EMBA
Kent Duncan PhD candidate, UCSF
Eva Raschke Scientist, Sangamo BioSciences, Inc.
Daniel Ratner PhD candidate, UC Berkeley, Materials Science and Engineering
Antonia Sequeira J.D. candidate, Boalt School of Law
Third Place ($10,000): TruVideo
Joseph DelCallar MBA 2001
Avideh Zakhor Professor of Electrical Engineering, EECS
Greg Chew BS EECS UC Berkeley.
Steven Stokols MBA 2002
Raj Manghani MBA 2001
People=01,s Choice Award ($5,000) RAPT Technologies
iMeda Solutions
Keith Wilcox MBA 2001
Heather Anderson MBA 2001
Solocom
Darin Boyd MBA 2001
Christine Mar MBA 2001
Joe Alioto MBA 2001
Jay Badenhope MBA 2002
Windoscope
Steve Schultz MBA 2001
Greg Simon Senior Staff Engineer, Motorola
Manu Chatterjee Senior Staff Software Engineer, Motorola
Gavin Bourne Business Development, Palm,
=====================================
|
3,462 |
Subject: Re: Interruptible Programs OII
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2295.
=====================================
Help me to understand.....if electricity is an "essential use" to a customer,
shouldn't they be on a firm schedule? Can we take our firm customers and put
them on an interruptible tariff and claim "essential use" everytime the ISO
calls a curtailment. Hmmmm. Sounds like the I-6 to me.
Susan J Mara@ENRON
12/05/2000 07:02 PM
To: Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil
Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Interruptible Programs OII
i have the sense that our customers may not like this. Any thoughts?
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 12/05/2000 04:58 PM -----
"Daniel Douglass" <[email protected]>
12/05/2000 11:55 AM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Interruptible Programs OII
Yesterday, a number of parties to the Interruptible OII c.00-10-002) filed
their proposals for what changes should be made to the utilities'
interruptible programs. A summary of those filings will be distributed later
this week. In addition the Energy Producers and Users Coalition filed an
emergency motion yesterday to make certain "refinements" to the utilities'
programs.
Specifically, the motion requests that the Commission:
1. Order Edison and PG&E to implement Optional Binding Mandatory Curtailment
(OBMC) programs for all distribution level customers. The OBMC should
provide flexible program criteria, recognizing that not all customers have
the same operational capability to control the manner and extent of
curtailment as envisioned by the Commission in directing the implementation
of mandatory curtailment plans in D.91548;
2. Establish clear procedures by which customers who are not operationally
suited to participate in the OBMC but who face some level of increased
environmental damage, health or safety risk upon sudden curtailment may
qualify under the "Essential Use" category of customers; and
3. Approve a new service alternative for customers that would experience a
disproportionate business interruption and economic impact upon interruption.
Let me know if you want to see a copy of the motion.
Dan
=====================================
|
3,463 |
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3931.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron on 04/26/2001 12:07 PM -----
Les Webber@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
04/26/2001 12:05 PM
To: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
CORRECT - I do not want Arizona (at least at this point).
Les
From: Lisa Yoho@ENRON on 04/26/2001 12:01 PM
To: Les Webber/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
let me confirm that you don't want the Arizona pipeline (which is regulated
by FERC).
Les Webber@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
04/26/2001 11:43 AM
To: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
Can we get paper - i.e. certificates, approvals, etc. for the pipeline in
California, in Mexico, and at the border (Presidential permit). I can also
task outside FERC counsel if it is going to be too time consuming for you.
Regards.
Les
From: Lisa Yoho@ENRON on 04/26/2001 11:23 AM
To: Les Webber/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
Les - let me know if you need more information. Lisa
----- Forwarded by Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron on 04/26/2001 11:23 AM -----
Ricardo Charvel
04/26/2001 10:49 AM
To: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
Sempra owns an LDC (that impoers gas from California) in Mexicali together
with a group called Proxima (Mexican private company) at least a couple of
years ago they began the project and then the construction of a natural gas
pipeline from California to ROSARITO. Rosarito is where several fuel fired
thermoelectric plants have been sited since the early 1960's. Now some gas
fired thermo's are being built and there is no nat gas in Baja other than the
one imported from the U.S. Sempra is building that line to supply the new
plants in Rosarito. Jeff Dasovich was trying to get that pipelint to be open
access last year. I am not sure where that is.
The building, permitting an dealing with the different interests in the
region ha been difficult.
If you need som more specific info. Please let me know.
Best,
Ricardo
Lisa Yoho
04/26/2001 10:41 AM
To: Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
Ricardo - do you know anything about Sempra's pipeline from Rosa Rita to San
Diego Gas & ELectric? We're trying to get information on the Mexican piece
of the pipeline.
Thanks.
Lisa
----- Forwarded by Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron on 04/26/2001 10:40 AM -----
Les Webber@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
04/26/2001 10:36 AM
To: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Sempra Pipeline
Great - I would like to know the controversy as well.
Can you contact help us with the Mexico side?
Regards.
Les
=====================================
|
3,464 |
Subject: Transwestern negotiated rate order, discussed at yesterday's
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '=20', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/11645.
=====================================
FYI. This is receiving close scrutiny by the Commission. RA
---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 07/26/2001 05:5=
9=20
PM ---------------------------
Nancy Bagot
07/26/2001 05:54 PM
To: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: =20
Subject: TW neg. rate order summary
(1) Transwestern Negotiated Rates proceeding, RP97-288 et al.: The order=
=20
calls for an expedited hearing to explore four primary issues (listed=20
below). The draft order passed at the meeting by a vote of 5 =01) 0, and=
=20
language on revisions to TW's tariff and posting policy were added to the=
=20
final order to assuage concerns expressed in the discussion of the case at=
=20
the meeting. =20
The case was called for public discussion by Commissioner Breathitt, who=20
wanted to highlight that the additional =01&limited scope=018 fast track he=
aring =20
is the =01&right way to go=018 to understand why negotiated rates that were=
seventy=20
times the maximum recourse rate are just and reasonable. Breathitt=01,s=20
additional question in this case is why shippers would agree to such rates=
=20
when lower rates were available.
In the final order, Breathitt=01,s concerns about the posting of the operat=
ional=20
capacity as such were reflected in language ordering TW to revise its tarif=
f=20
and web postings to provide clear identification of operational capacity an=
d=20
to post and contract such capacity on each day of its availability (i.e., o=
n=20
a day-to-day basis) unless it can demonstrate that operational capacity wil=
l=20
be available for some longer period of time.
At Wednesday=01,s meeting, Wood noted that =01&we bumped into something her=
e,=018=20
though he did not mention possibilities but instead agreed that a procedura=
l=20
schedule to =01&vet the issues in the light of day=018 was the best route. =
The=20
four issues set for hearing are: =20
? whether the transportation capacity was advertised and awarded in an=20
accurate and fair manner consistent with Transwestern=01,s tariff;=20
? whether the transportation rates=01(were the product of an exercise of=
=20
market power (i.e., did TW withhold capacity that otherwise could have=
=20
been made available under recourse service in order to make the capacity=
=20
available under negotiated rate charges at substantially higher rates);=
=20
? why the shippers agreed to these rates when significantly lower recours=
e=20
rates should have been available under our negotiated rate program; and=
=20
? why the awarded capacity appears to be available without interruption=
=20
while firm transportation service under Transwestern=01,s recourse rate=
was=20
not.
=====================================
|
3,465 |
Subject: Editorial from Today's Sac Bee
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/343.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 09/22/2000 01:45 PM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
09/22/2000 01:40 PM
To: [email protected], Steve Kean, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Editorial from Today's Sac Bee
Too hot a market: How energy producers manipulate California
(Published Sept. 22, 2000)
The priciest place to shop this August in California was in Pasadena. There
at the California Power Exchange, where much of the state's electricity is
bought and sold, prices that utilities paid for power (an average $166 per
megawatt) were up fivefold from the previous August ($32). What is happening?
Among other things, too much power on hot days is being purchased in the
near-panic environment that develops in the hours before a possible crisis.
Too little is being purchased as it should be -- days, or even months, in
advance.
How was this new market-based system of buying electricity supposed to work?
Much of the action was supposed to take place at the Power Exchange. There
vibrant trading was supposed to exist in a variety of markets. Some utilities
would be busy shopping for electricity the next day. Others, depending on
their needs, would be squirreling away supply a month, even a year, in
advance.
Selling this power are private companies that have been busy purchasing
fossil-fuel burning generators from the state's investor-owned utilities.
Under the state's restructuring of electricity, these utilities were
obligated to sell their fossil-fuel burning plants, but not necessarily their
nuclear or hydroelectric generators.
On any given day, up to 95 percent of the power needed to fuel California was
supposed to be already purchased. The idea was to leave just a little bit for
the last minute. Headquartered in Folsom, the state's entire grid is managed
by an agency known as the Independent System Operator. The ISO's job is to
buy whatever extra power is necessary to keep the lights on. With literally
only hours to work with, the ISO is ill-suited to drive hard bargains. The
ISO pays up to $250 per megawatt.
The problem is that the ISO's spot market is way too big, and too pricey. It
is buying up to 30 percent of California's power on some days, particularly
hot ones. This August, less power is being purchased in those struggling
futures market down in Pasadena. More was being bought in Folsom. This is a
telltale sign that California's electricity market is working for those who
own power plants, not those who pay the bills that are poised to rise.
=====================================
|
3,466 |
Subject: Re: California Rate Assessment (371.35)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9730.
=====================================
The notion that it would have to be a monthly analysis sounds like pure
Roger, and could likely be correct. But we need to determine whether we can
get what we need by doing a "less precise" annual versus a "monthly." Seems
that once we've made that call, we direct the scenario and they do it.
Thoughts?
Best,
Jeff
Robert Neustaedter@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
03/07/2001 09:36 AM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: California Rate Assessment (371.35)
Any suggestions to expedite the process?
Robert
----- Forwarded by Robert Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 03/07/2001 09:38
AM -----
"Bill Monsen" <[email protected]>
03/06/2001 10:31 PM
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: California Rate Assessment (371.35)
Robert,
Thanks for the note. A conference call at 12:30 pm PST would work for us.
However, on that call, we will not be able to present results of the
additional scenarios that you defined in your e-mail. The model that we
used was an annual rate model. The analysis that you are proposing would
require a monthly model, which would take additional time to develop.
Perhaps we should discuss this prior to the call at 2:30 pm CST. Roger and
I will give you a call when we get into the office on Wednesday morning.
This should be around 11 am CST.
Best regards,
Bill
At 05:32 PM 3/6/01 , [email protected] wrote:
>Bill and Roger,
>
>Thanks for the quick turn-around on the analysis. I hope the weekend was
>not totally ruined. After review of the study, we thought it would be
>useful to further expand the scenarios into a Worst, Base and Best Case.
>The scenarios we would like you to run are outlined in the attached file.
>Each scenario would reflect a wet, dry and normal weather case.
>Please note that each scenario has a different date for surcharge
>implementation. The Best Case reflects the date included in your original
>analysis. Along those lines, would you please expand on the rationale for
>assuming the 1/01/02 implementation date.
>
>In addition to reflecting the rate impact on a cents per kwh basis, please
>include a percent impact as well.
>
>Like our original request, we are on a fast-track. We would like to
>schedule a conference call for 2:30 p.m. central time Wednesday (March 7)
>to discuss the results of your analysis. Hopefully, the data you have
>already generated can be quickly "massaged" to accomodate the scenarios
>requested.
>
>Please call me at 713 853 3170 if you have any questions.
>
>Robert
>
>(See attached file: California Rate Scenarios.doc)
=====================================
|
3,467 |
Subject: Re: Information re: Commissioner McIntyre
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'Jessica', 'Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT', 'Mollie Gustafson/PDX/ECT@ECT']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2240.
=====================================
Off what hook?
Paul Kaufman@ECT
10/10/2000 11:04 AM
To: Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona Petrochko
cc:
Subject: Information re: Commissioner McIntyre
Y'er off the hook, matee.
---------------------- Forwarded by Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT on 10/10/2000 09:09
AM ---------------------------
Lysa Akin
10/09/2000 02:18 PM
To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jake Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F
Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mollie Gustafson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jessica
Burry/PDX/ECT@ECT
Subject: Information re: Commissioner McIntyre
I have just been advised by Commissioner McIntyre's office that he will NOT
be traveling to Portland this week. Subsequently (obviously) he has
cancelled his visit to the trading floor scheduled for Oct. 13th.
We will try and coordinate with the Commissioner's office to arrange a visit
at a later date.
Lysa
---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 10/09/2000 02:22 PM
---------------------------
Lysa Akin
09/28/2000 01:47 PM
To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jake Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F
Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT
cc: Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mollie Gustafson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jessica
Burry/PDX/ECT@ECT
Subject: Information re: Commissioner McIntyre
As you know, I have been working with the Commissioner's office to arrange
for Cmmr. McIntyre
to tour the floor when he is in Portland the 12th & 13th of October.
Just to update you:
The Commr. is unavailable the 12th. He will be in the office the 13th at
2:00pm
Tim Belden has indicated that he is available the 13th, and I have reserved
Mt. St. Helens in his name at 2:00pm.
Jake Thomas is out of country and cannot attend.
Chris Calger is out of the office the 13th and cannot attend.
Paul Kaufman is out of the office and cannot attend.
Tim, if you would like my assistance in planning the visit, please let me
know!
Lysa
x7927
---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 09/28/2000 01:37 PM
---------------------------
Lysa Akin
09/28/2000 01:31 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Directions/Instructions for Portland Trip
Cynthia - Here is a map from the hotel to the office.
From street level, Commissioner McIntyre will need to take the escalator at
Three (3) World Trade Center up to the main entrance.
Inside the double doors is a guard desk. He needs to sign in and get a Guest
pass.
They will ask him who he is here to see and he should advise Lysa Akin and
give them my extension at 7927.
I will then come down and escort him to the floor.
Lysa Akin
Ass't to Paul Kaufman
503/464-7927
=====================================
|
3,468 |
Subject: RE: Bluegrass Weekend at Sierra Club Lodge
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8461.
=====================================
I just penned it in my new, leather calender that Cameron gave to me so that
I might become a little more organized. Do you think we might be able to
snowboard (ski) instead of cross-country ski?
>From: Cameron Sellers <[email protected]>
>To: 'Prentice Sellers' <[email protected]>, [email protected], Scott
>Laughlin <[email protected]>
>Subject: RE: Bluegrass Weekend at Sierra Club Lodge
>Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 08:38:18 -0800
>
>I think we should definitely go. I could not go up until Friday. Please
>make reservations!!!
>
>
>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: Prentice Sellers [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 6:34 PM
>To: Cameron Sellers; [email protected]; Scott Laughlin
>Subject: Bluegrass Weekend at Sierra Club Lodge
>
>In case it's not on your calendars, the bluegrass weekend at the Sierra
>Club's Claire Tappan Lodge is:
>
>March 16-18
>
>It's $46 per person per night
>Includes 3 meals
>
>If we're going to go, I think we should make reservations right away. If
>so, do we plan on getting up there Friday night? I can make the
>reservations if you let me know.
>
>I haven't found any info yet on the free one...
>
>Here's some info I copied from the Claire Tappan Lodge website:
>http://www.sierraclub.org/outings/lodges/ctl/index.asp
>
>Clair Tappaan is located at 7000 feet, 45 minutes drive west of Reno - 1
>mile from Sugar Bowl. The living room has an enormous stone fireplace.
>There is a library, a large communal dinning room, a social lounge, and a
>hot tub. The lodge maintains 10 to 12 kilometers of groomed cross-country
>ski trails and offers excellent instruction in both Nordic track and
>telemark techniques. Top quality cross-country skis and snowshoes are also
>available to rent at very reasonable rates.
>
>Guests needs to provide their own pillow, toiletries, towel, sleeping bag
>or
>comparable linens, and bathing suit if they wish to use the hot tub. We ask
>guests to choose a house chore to do each day they eat at the lodge.
>
>March 16-18: Blue Grass Weekend. Calling amateurs and proffesionals alike
>to a weekend of great jam sessions in the afternoons and a performance by
>the Donner Peak Pickers in the evening. The Pickers are a fantastic bunch
>of
>widely-experienced musicians playing traditional Bluegrass with superb
>instrumental craftsmanship.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
=====================================
|
3,469 |
Subject: RE: FW: E & G Purchases of Opus One
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9132.
=====================================
sure. what's the price tag?
Nancy Sellers <[email protected]>
02/14/2001 07:02 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: FW: E & G Purchases of Opus One
4 for each of us??
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:51 PM
To: Nancy Sellers
Subject: Re: FW: E & G Purchases of Opus One
yes.
Nancy
Sellers
<Nancy.Sellers@RobertMo To: Cameron
<[email protected]>, Jeff
ndavi.com> Dasovich
<[email protected]>, "Prentice @
Berkeley"
<[email protected]>, Prentice
02/14/2001 04:04 PM Sellers
<[email protected]>, Scott Laughlin
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: FW: E & G
Purchases of Opus One
I am going to order the last of the 12 bottle units that I can order (per
this memo below) but I do not want all 12 - do you guys want to share in
this allocation?
<<...OLE_Obj...>>
MEMORANDUM
1/24/01
* Please Post for those without Email *
TO: Employees of Opus One, Robert Mondavi and Baron Philippe de
Rothschild
FROM: Peter Ventura
RE: E&G Purchases of Opus One
While demand for Opus One has grown significantly, case production has
remained level if in fact not declined-and will decline further for the
1998 vintage. This has lead to very strict allocations in the marketplace
and a need to conserve.
Please note as of March 1, 2001, for all employees and growers of Opus One,
Robert Mondavi Winery and Baron Philippe de Rothschild, purchase limits on
the current vintage of Opus One will change from twelve to six 750 ml.
bottles per person. We expect to offer the current vintage, the 1997,
until October of this year, at which time the 1998 will be released.
Thank you in advance for your understanding and cooperation.
=====================================
|
3,470 |
Subject: NEWS: CPUC decision on 3 cent rate increase for PG&E/SCE
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'Jeff', 'James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron', 'Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12599.
=====================================
---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES on 05/16/2001
10:09 AM ---------------------------
From: Harry Kingerski@ENRON on 05/16/2001 10:06 AM
To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R
Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda
Curry/HOU/EES@EES, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES,
Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES,
Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Marcus
Dotson/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C
Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES,
Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], [email protected]
cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Robert
Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: CPUC decision on 3 cent rate increase for PG&E/SCE
Highlights:
Direct access customers are exempt from the surcharge.
In giving its first hint on what it will do with the PX credit process, it
said "we will proceed to reexamine and redesign the direct access credit
system to reflect current structural reality." (Translation - no
market-based PX credits)
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). Responsibility for residential
subsidy is split one third each to residential, commercial, and industrial
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 put in place. No increase up to 130% of
baseline (first 2 tiers), rate for fifth tier (above 300% of baseline) is
about doubled.
Non-residential rate design - recommendations to put all of the increase into
summer on-peak were rejected. About 60% of increase put into summer.
Industrial customers get a bill limiter which caps the average increase for a
given customer to 12.3 cents/kwh for PG&E and 12.9 cents/kwh for SCE.
Real Time Pricing was endorsed - will further explore in workshops starting
later in May. Voluntary program will be started.
Federal facilities will be subject to a market rate pilot program.
Utilities are directed to specifically state on each bill the energy charges,
including the 3 cent surcharge
Below is a more complete summary of the CPUC decision on the PG&E/SCE rate
increase (prepared by Jeanne Bennett).
=====================================
|
3,471 |
Subject: [Fwd: Invitation to Attend: Business Forecast Luncheon, Thurs.,
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/27762.
=====================================
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from s544014.haas.berkeley.edu (haas-s544014.Haas.Berkeley.EDU=20
[128.32.70.106]) by haas.berkeley.edu (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id=20
f5BNHZj02029 for <[email protected]>; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:17:35 -07=
00=20
(PDT)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
X-Sender: [email protected]
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:17:32 -0700
To: [email protected]
From: Linda Coffee <[email protected]>
Subject: Invitation to Attend: Business Forecast Luncheon, Thurs., June 14
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;=20
boundary=3D"=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
_26477122=3D=3D_.ALT"
Josh,
Can you forward this email ASAP (the event is this Thursday) to the current=
=20
Evening MBA students?? There are a limited number of spots available to=20
attend the Business Forecast Luncheon as a sponsored student.
Thanks!
Linda
***************************
Greetings!
The Haas Alumni Relations Office would like to invite you to attend the 200=
1=20
Business Forecast Luncheon as an alumni sponsored student.? Due to the=20
generous contribution of Haas School alumni and friends, we are able to=20
extend the opportunity for you to attend the 2001 Business Forecast Luncheo=
n=20
on Thursday, June 14 free of charge.? There are a limited number of spots=
=20
available.=20
The Luncheon will take place at The City Club at the Stock Exchange Tower i=
n=20
San Francisco from? 11:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m.? Professional dress is suggested=
.?=20
For more information about the event go to:?=20
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/alumni. The keynote speaker is Warren Hellman,=
=20
BA 55, Chairman of Hellman & Friedman LLC, who will be speaking on "NASDAQ'=
s=20
Strategic Restructuring into a Private, For-Profit Securities Market.=018
If you accept this invitation, we will ask you to write a thank you note to=
=20
the sponsor after the event which will help encourage alumni to continue th=
e=20
tradition of sponsoring students for Haas School events.
Please RSVP as soon as possible since we will take reservations on a "first=
=20
come first serve" basis.? Just hit REPLY and provide me with your full name=
,=20
anticipated degree and class year, email address and a phone number.? Once=
=20
the spots are filled (we'll send each person a confirmation email) we will=
=20
keep the rest of the names on a waiting list and will contact those people =
if=20
space opens up.
Thanks and I hope you consider coming to this wonderful event.=20
Linda Coffee
Assistant Director, Alumni Relations
Haas School of Business
=====================================
|
3,472 |
Subject: (BN ) Enron's Lay Says California May Delay Portland Genera
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8595.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Sharonda Stephens/Corp/Enron on 01/25/2001 11:22 AM -----
"ANN SCHMIDT, ENRON CORP." <[email protected]>
01/25/2001 11:20 AM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: (BN ) Enron's Lay Says California May Delay Portland Genera
enron story
Enron's Lay Says California May Delay Portland General Sale
1/25/1 11:10 (New York)
Enron's Lay Says California May Delay Portland General Sale
Houston, Jan. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Enron Corp.'s $3.1 billion
sale of Portland General Electric to Sierra Pacific Resources may
be delayed because of California's electricity crisis, Enron
Chairman Ken Lay said.
Enron, the world's biggest energy trader, still expects to
complete the transaction this quarter as planned, Lay said. It has
won all regulatory approvals except that of the Securities and
Exchange Commission, which Lay expects in March.
Sierra, a utility owner based in Reno, Nevada, agreed to buy
Portland General in November 1999 for $2.1 billion in cash and
$1 billion in assumed debt to add 700,000 customers in Oregon.
Sierra sells power into the California market.
``The sale could be delayed somewhat by the California
mess,'' Lay said at analyst conference in Houston. ``It's still
not a certainty.''
In the meantime, Portland General will ``generate good cash
flows and good earnings,'' Lay said. Enron bought Portland General
in 1997 as a platform to sell power into California's deregulating
market.
California's two biggest utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric
and Southern California Edison, are near bankruptcy after paying
soaring prices for power and being barred from passing the costs
on to customers. The state has stepped in to buy electricity on
behalf of the cash-strapped utilities.
Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, Enron's president and incoming
chief executive, said the Houston-based company is shifting its
emphasis away from shaping new businesses and toward boosting
growth.
Skilling values Enron's shares at $126, including $57 for its
wholesale-energy business and $40 for its telecommunications
division. The shares rose $1.50 to $81.25 in midmorning trading.
Sierra Pacific rose 6 cents to $15.
--Margot Habiby in the Dallas newsroom (214) 740-0873, or
[email protected], through the Princeton newsroom
(609) 279-4000/shf
Story illustration: To compare Enron's share performance and
earnings history with other members of its industry, please see
{ENE US <Equity> RV <GO>}.
Company news:
ENE US <Equity> CN
SRP US <Equity> CN
NI codes:
NI COS
NI TX
NI NV
NI CA
NI OR
NI US
NI CMD
NI UTI
NI GAS
NI ELC
NI NRG
NI PIP
NI MNA
NI RULEs
-0- (BN ) Jan/25/2001 16:10 GMT
=====================================
|
3,473 |
Subject: Mobile Outlook: June 5-6, San Francisco
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4166.
=====================================
Jeffrey,
As a VentureWire subscriber, I wanted to give you the
latest update on Mobile Outlook in San Francisco,
June 5 - 6. Mobile Outlook will bring together the
venture capital and investment communities with the
CEOs of the private organizations that are leading
development of the Wireless Industry. Be sure to be
in San Francisco on June 5th & 6th in order to assess
the companies shaping the next big trends in the
Wireless Industry! To register online or learn more
about this event go to: http://www.mobile2001.net
Here is What to Expect at Mobile Outlook:
Jeffrey, despite the slowdown in the market, there
are still significant investment opportunities in the
wireless industry. At Mobile Outlook, we will examine
the possibilities and pitfalls of mobile connectivity,
and cover the market and technology opportunities for
innovators and investors alike. You will be able to see
firsthand the latest technologies from up-and-coming
startups as well as establish contacts with the leading
entrepreneurs and investors who will make the mobile
Internet a reality:
* Get the true story from our panel discussions featuring
top-notch industry players, such as Bob Pinna, president
of Mobilize; Daren Tsui, chief executive officer of SkyGo;
and Rama Aysola, president & CEO of AirFlash
* Pick and choose from up to 80 management presen-
tations, featuring promising, private companies, such as
AirMedia, ePhysician, Informio, Morphics Technology,
Neomar, Qpass, and Tresidder Networks.
* Watch firsthand as Richard A. Shaffer and his panel
of experts select the "Investors' Choice" awards
designating companies most likely to succeed, at
the end of the Mobile Outlook Conference.
* And, at the end of the day, you can check out the
latest gadgets and gizmos during our product
demonstrations and reception.
As with our past Outlook conferences, Mobile Outlook
may sell out soon. If you register by April 30th,
you may save $100! So to reserve your place today,
please register online at:
http://www.mobile2001.net?e=MO01GHD7
Remember, Jeffrey, as a valuable subscriber to
VentureWire, we want you to make sure you have the
opportunity to register and attend the first Mobile
Outlook conference.
Cordially,
Allan Cunningham
Managing Director, Events
[email protected]
http://mobile2001.net/
p.s. Does this conference sound like the perfect
opportunity for your company or services to gain
additional exposure? If so, contact Michael Dodd at
212-343-1900 ext. 118 to learn more about Mobile
Outlook sponsorship opportunities.
If you choose to NOT receive e-mail promotions from us,
please follow this link:
http://venturewire.com/[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,474 |
Subject: Re: Draft Letter for Ben Quillian
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/409.
=====================================
Dirk--
I would really appreciate it if you would not send any more correspondence re
chronology to CSUF or anyone else outside of Enron without Legal and P&GA
signoff. Regardless of our relationship with CSUF, there is no such thing as
"draft" correspondence outside of Enron. Everything that is sent outside the
company, and most correspondence within the company, is discoverable in
litigation, whether it has been blessed or not. I am especially concerned
about that statement that Enron intends to escalate this matter within Enron,
PG&E and/or the CPUC, since with Project Mercury going on we may have
strategic reasons not to discuss this project with PG&E or the CPUC that
override our interest in CSUF. In addition, I am concerned that if PG&E gets
a hold of this correspondence, it may be used against us in the future as a
means to twist our chronology around. I also need to get clear verification
of the chronology and breakdown of costs so that we can be sure that we
present our story in the best possible light.
Again, please do not send any more correspondence to CSUF regarding this
project, and especially regarding Enron's future actions with regard to this
project, without clearing it beforehand with Legal and Gov't Affairs, whether
"draft" or otherwise. In addition, we will need to send CSUF an email either
"retracting" the correspondence you just sent or stating that CSUF must not
rely on the correspondence until we have verified all of the facts
surrounding our view of the project. I will assist you in drafting this
email to CSUF.
Thanks for helping keep this under control until we have all of the
stakeholders, including our betters in Houston, fully apprised of the
situation.
Pls call or email if you would like to discuss further.
AW
From: Dirk vanUlden/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange on 03/10/2000
06:06 PM CST
To: Bob Boyd <[email protected]>@SMTP@Exchange, Dick Smith
<[email protected]>@SMTP@Exchange
cc: Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Geoff
Pollard/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff
Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Andrew Wu/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Draft Letter for Ben Quillian
Bob and Dick - as you requested, I am attaching a draft chronology letter for
your use. Please understand that this has not been blessed by our Law Dept as
it is only intended to provide guidelines for you.
If you require a formal version endorsed by Enron you need to let me know and
I'll run it by our attorney. Call me if you have any questions.
Dirk A.van Ulden
Director, Account and Facility Management
San Ramon District
(925) 543-3879
Fax (925) 543-3550
[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,475 |
Subject: Message from Mike Heinrich: Congestion Management Through Market s
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5296.
=====================================
<<...>>
5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 522
Santa Clara, CA 95054
408 517-2100
408 517-2985 fax
Dear Colleague,
As your may be aware, we have invited you and your company to an extremely
important meeting on February 21, 2001 at the APX headquarters in Santa
Clara to discuss a solution to the critical problem we have today in our
California market regarding congestion management and CAISO schedule cuts.
This problem is costing us millions of dollars today and continued pro-rata
schedule cuts as a method of congestion management will escalate
substantially to well over $100,000,000 and could even rise above that
before the end of this year.
Since the California Power Exchange no longer operates an adjustment bid
portfolio market to manage congestion, APX has discussed the potential of
operating a similar market with the CAISO. Technically, our solution is
sound and the CAISO endorses this market. APX is uniquely capable of
developing this market as an interim solution until the California ISO
settles on its longer term congestion reform methodology. Without this
market, we all stand to lose millions of dollars by having schedules cut by
the CAISO because there are no other short term alternatives to congestion
management. The investment we will require from you to develop this interim
solution will be minor compared to the financial impact without it.
We are asking you to attend this meeting and to confirm your desire to see
such a solution provided by APX. Ultimately we will seek financial
commitments prior to developing the solution but believe it is feasible to
have it in place well before the summer season. Due to its interim nature
we will seek a flat fixed fee such that its planned abandonment will not
negatively impact APX with the more permanent change to congestion
management that will eventually be implemented by the CAISO.
The attached agenda provides an updated outline of our planned activities.
These include a brief introduction and review of why this is important to
California market participants and the impact of doing nothing, an overview
of how such a market will work, and a presentation by the CAISO regarding
integration issues with current CAISO congestion management procedures.
We welcome your participation in this most important meeting next week and
look forward to your commitment to a successful resolution of this
situation.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Heinrich John Stremel
Vice President Vice President
<<Agenda 02_15_2001.doc>>
Barbara Tardio
Department Administrator
Automated Power Exchange
5201 Great America Parkway
Suite 522
Santa Clara CA 95054
408 517-2153
425 940-7850 (e-fax)
- Agenda 02_15_2001.doc
=====================================
|
3,476 |
Subject: Library Orientation on 9/4 - synopsis of resources covered
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1827.
=====================================
Dear Students,
Topics Covered at Library Orientation on Monday 9/4
Links from library website at http://library.berkeley.edu/BUSI
Pathfinder - catalog of all UCB libraries except Law Library
search, save and email records of UCB holdings to yourself or friends
Melvyl - catalog of all-UC libraries, California Periodicals Database
(catalog of journals in all California University and some public and
special libraries), search, save and email records.
Access to some databases. When emailing database articles, be sure to
click on "text" on the email screen, otherwise only the citation will be
emailed to you.
Research Guides - resources in specific subject areas. Databases & print
materials.
Electronic Journals - access to journals in electronic format
Electronic Books - e-books including some business and economics titles
Electronic Reference Tools - Dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc.
Electronic Databases - drop down menu with links to 20 or so business
databases. We looked at these this evening:
ABI/Inform - The best database for management articles and general business
topics going back to 1981. Scholarly and some popular and trade journals
are indexed and abstracted, and about 70% of the articles are available in
full text. Use the Power Search option. Lots of case studies - can limit
search to case studies only. Various other options. Mark in check boxes the
articles you want to email to yourself or if you want to format something
for printing. On the email screen, check the box for sending "text" so you
don't get sent only a citation.
Dow Jones Interactive - Newstand has current news from Wall STreet Journal
(USA, Asia and Europe versions), New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times
as well as the big business magazines like Business Week, Forbes,
Economist, etc.
Dow Jones Library has articles from thousands of business magazines and
newspapers (internationally), most of which are available for 10 or more
years. Majority of publications indexed are available in fulltext.
Onesource - password accessible from anywhere with a browser. Aggregate of
information from many high quality business databases. Great for company
and industry research as well as other business topics. Very
straightforward to use.
Econlit - great abstracts from core economics journals, plus some others
that are also quite good.
Reuters Business Insight - market research reports in energy, healthcare,
technology, consumer goods.
Remote access link - remotely access the library's databases through the
proxy server - instructions available at http://proxy.lib.berkeley.edu.
Or,
use the new Terminal Server at http://tsweb.haas.berkeley.edu
Enough said! Time to work.
Monica
=====================================
|
3,477 |
Subject: Campaign Leadership Call (Another Change!!!!!!)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10549.
=====================================
Please make note of the new schedule for the Campaign Leadership Call:
Call will now take place on Monday's & Thursday's @ 4:30 PM (CDT). The next
call is scheduled for Thursday, April 5.
Don't hesitate to call me if you have any questions.
gngr
---------------------- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron on 04/02/2001
04:35 PM ---------------------------
Ginger Dernehl
03/26/2001 02:05 PM
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, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Terri Miller/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: (Change in time of call) Campaign Leadership Call
Please make note of the change in time of the "Campaign Leadership Call" .
Beginning Tuesday, March 27, 2001 the call will take place daily at 4:30pm
CST instead of 11:30am CST. The dial in number and location for this call
will remain the same.
Thanks and please call if you have any questions.
gngr
713-853-7751
----- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron on 03/26/2001 01:14 PM -----
Ginger Dernehl
03/23/2001 05:22 PM
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, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Terri Miller/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Campaign Leadership Call
Beginning Monday, March 26, 2001 there will be a daily "Campaign Leadership
Call". This conference call was referenced in a memo sent via e:mail by Rick
this afternoon, Friday, March 23. Please remember to mark your calendars
accordingly.
Date: Daily, beginning Monday, March 26, 2001
Time: 11:30am - 12:00pm (CST) call to last 1/2 hour
Number: 1-800-283-1805
Location: EB4701 (for those in Houston)
Feel free to call me if you have any additional questions or concerns.
gngr
713-853-7751
=====================================
|
3,478 |
Subject: Re: Enron Turns Internal Credit-Risk Tool Into New Product
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4489.
=====================================
Very interesting - thanks! Do you know any folks involved in this? It
might be very interesting to write a mini-case for next year about it.
At 05:01 PM 4/4/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Thought that you might find this interesting.
>
>Best,
>Jeff
>
>Enron Turns Internal Credit-Risk Tool Into New Product
>2001-04-04 17:19 (New York)
>
>
>
> By Christina Cheddar
> Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
>
> NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--With the number of corporate bankruptcies on the
>rise,
>knowing the creditworthiness of one's customers is becoming more and more
>important.
> For Enron Corp. (ENE), the world's largest energy trading company,
>keeping
>track of credit risk has always been part of doing business. That became
>even
>more true with the company's launch of EnronOnline, its Internet-based
>commodities trading network.
> In order to deal with the accelerated volume and speed of transactions on
>EnronOnline, the company developed a tool to help its own commercial
>traders
>manage the credit risk.
> Early last year, Enron rolled out this tool, Enron Credit, on a limited
>basis. Gradually, the company expanded its use and scope. Last month, the
>company re-launched Enron Credit in its current format.
> Enron Credit tracks more than 10,000 companies, giving each a rating
>known as
>the "Enron cost of credit." The rating is expressed as an interest rate.
> The Web site also provides news, a company's expected chance of
>bankruptcy
>and other related information.
> While much of this information is free to registered users, Enron also
>has
>turned the product into a new revenue stream.
> Users may download data into a spreadsheet and receive periodic updates
>for a
>fee.
> The site also can sell a user a "digital bankruptcy swap," which is a way
>to
>hedge against credit exposure.
> The price of the swap is determined by a rating Enron's staff assigns to
>a
>company and the amount of credit exposure a company needs to protect
>against.
> For a supplier, the main advantage of a swap is that if a customer is
>unable
>to pay due to bankruptcy, the supplier will be paid immediately.
> According to Enron Europe President John Sherriff, the goal of Enron
>Credit
>is to create a more efficient credit market by increasing trading
>liquidity.
> The tool is important because "in just a short amount of time, a
>company's
>credit can go from stellar to bad literally overnight."
> At present, some analysts haven't factored in revenue from Enron Credit
>into
>their earnings models. However, as the commodity markets Enron trades in
>mature, it is possible the need for products such as Enron Credit could
>increase.
> -By Christina Cheddar, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5166
>
>
>
=====================================
|
3,479 |
Subject: Re: Sempra
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/673.
=====================================
Thanks. Didn't get it the first time. Good comments. I'm actually in
Vancouver today (Monday) and tomorrow. Let's keep sending back and forth and
get together Wednesday morning to finalize. I'll get a hold of Calger for
his comments. You can leave messages on my voicemail, too.
Best,
Jeff
Laird Dyer@ECT
10/16/2000 09:15 AM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Sempra
Jeff,
I don't know if my e:mail from home got to you so I am applying the fail-safe
method. Discard if you already got it.
Thanks,
Laird
----- Forwarded by Laird Dyer/SF/ECT on 10/16/2000 07:14 AM -----
"Douglas Dyer" <[email protected]>
10/15/2000 01:35 PM
To: <[email protected]>
cc: <[email protected]>
Subject: Sempra
Jeff,
?
I will not be in the office tomorrow - off to Sacramento to see NCPA - but I
wanted to provide my comments regarding the Sempra presentation.? First of
all, you did a great job.??I don't know about "Partnership Solutions";
however, I can't think of a better description of what we want so, let's
make it work.
?
Here are my comments:
?
1.? On the page, "Partnership Goals", under 2nd bullet.
?
??? Change "Enhance earnings" to "Enhance earnings; Expand P/E Multiple"
?
2.? On the page, "Energy Solutions", remove both 25 MW quotes.? They don't
have much meaning to Sempra; therefore, I suggest we go with the two 500 MW
quotes only.
?
3.? On the page, "Energy Solutions", under the 2nd bullet.
?
??? Change "Sempra gets better...." to
?
??? "Enhanced access to markets"
??? "Open, liquid and competitive"
??? "Defensible to oversight entities"
?
4.? On the page, "Benefits of Online Independent Auction", the 3rd and 4th
bullets?are not?benefits of the auction.? They are benefits of?a fixed price
product. Do we need a bullet to suggest that Sempra needs a portfolio
approach which includes some fixed priced products?
?
5.? On the page, "Enron Can Help", under the 4th bullet, change Lot
formulation to Product Specifications.? After Pre-Qualification:?
Experience,?Capability, Credit-worthiness, Reliability
?
6.? On the page, "Gas Solution, Procurement Outsourcing 1", under the 1st
bullet, indicate multi-year instead of 10 year.
?
7.? On the page, "Gas Solution, Procurement Outsourcing 2", in the 2nd
bullet, pluralize service to services.
?
8.? On the page, "Benefits of Procurement Outsourcing", under the 1st bullet
in the 3rd point (responsive to financial community) - Add to the existing
statement, Reduce?regulatory risk tied to procurement, "Enhance Earnings,
Expand P/E Multiple".
?
Thanks for your efforts in developing this.? I'll be in late Monday and
Tuesday morning.
?
Laird
=====================================
|
3,480 |
Subject: Re: Keynote Speaker: IPPSA 7th Annual Conference
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/1027.
=====================================
Glad to hear it. On the down side, it appears that I won't get you that
email I promised until tomorrow. If that's totally unacceptable, let me know.
Best,
Jeff
Robert Hemstock@ECT
11/16/2000 04:05 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Keynote Speaker: IPPSA 7th Annual Conference
He called me today and confirmed he will come. Thanks for your help.
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 11/15/2000 07:33 PM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Keynote Speaker: IPPSA 7th Annual Conference
Left a message with the good doctor. Will let you know just as soon as I
hear.
Best,
Jeff
Robert Hemstock@ECT
11/15/2000 04:23 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Keynote Speaker: IPPSA 7th Annual Conference
---------------------- Forwarded by Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT on 11/15/2000
03:22 PM ---------------------------
From: Robert Hemstock 11/09/2000 01:04 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Keynote Speaker: IPPSA 7th Annual Conference
Professor Michaels,
Further to the voicemail message I left for you today regarding speaking
early next year at the IPPSA Conference in Banff, Alberta the details are:
Topic: The California Experience - Lessons that Alberta Can Learn From (or
something like this title - although I was unable to open the presentation on
your website entitled" "California's Electrical Disaster and the Furture of
Competitive Power" I would expect based on this title that much of what is in
that presentation would be of interest to those attending the IPPSA
Conference.
Date: Monday March 19, 2001 13:00 - 13:30 (Conference is 2 full days - March
19-20, 2001)
Reimbursements: Travel (economy class) and one night at Rimrock Hotel. Also
free conference registration (which includes meals during conference).
Deadline for presentation materials so they can be included in the conference
binder: February 28, 2001
Conference Information: the conference is held at the Rimrock Hotel in Banff,
Alberta and has been sold out the last three years. It will attract about
400 delegates in 2001 from across Canada and the U.S. with the majority of
the delegates being generation developers, large consumers, marketers, and
policy makers from Western Canada. The speakers include a number of respected
academics/consultants from across North America, senior industry
representatives, senior government representatives, and senior
representatives from the Alberta Transmission Administrator and Power Pool of
Alberta.
I look forward to your reply. My telephone number is (403) 974-6746.
Regards,
Rob Hemstock
=====================================
|
3,481 |
Subject: Federal Register Report for Period 3/2/01 to 3/14/01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10012.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 03/15/2001 12:41 PM -----
Eric Benson
03/14/2001 01:40 PM
To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Federal Register Report for Period 3/2/01 to 3/14/01
Sue -
The following reports Federal Register notices for the period ending March
14, 2001:
DATE AGENCY SUMMARY IMPORTANT DATES
3/7/01 FCC petition for reconsideration filed re amendment of Part 2 of the
commission's rules to allocation Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed
Services to Support the Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services,
including Third Generation Wireless Systems opposition must be filed by March 22,
2001; replies to an opposition must be filed within 10 days after time for
filing oppositions have expired
FCC deadline by which states must indicate their decision to "opt out" of
existing 800 MHz planning regions for Public Safety 700 MHz band regional
planning; FCC decided that the 700 MHz regional planning committees would be
based on the same 55 800 MHz planning regions; FCC also decided to allow
states or territories no in regions defined by state boundaries to opt out of
their existing regions to form or join a planning regions that follows their
state's boundaries; states that do not file an opt out report by the deadline
date will continue to be included in their existing planning regions opt out
decisions must be reported to the WTB by July 2, 2001
FCC commission denied Qwest petition for reconsideration of FCC 12/30/99
Depreciation Order; petition sought reconsideration of FCC denial of United
States Telephone Association petition for forbearance; the methodology for
certain equipment life ranges, and the accounting treatment in waiver
situation; in Depreciation Order we undertook an extensive review of FCC
depreciation requirements for price cap incumbent local exchange carriers
3/6/01 FCC document announces the auction of 16 VHF public coast licenses and
241 multilateral Location and Monitoring Services Spectrum scheduled for
6/6/01; notice seeks comments on reserve prices and minimum opening bids and
other procedural issues re Auction No. 39 comments due March 9, 2001 and reply
comments due March 16, 2001
3/5/01 FCC Common Carrier Bureau grants motion for limited extension of time
for filing comments and reply comments on the use of unbundled network
elements to provide exchange access service comments are due April 5, 2001 and reply
comments are due April 30, 2001
3/2/01 FCC future development of SMR Systems in the 800 MHz Frequency Band,
Regulatory Treatment of Mobile Services, and Competitive Bidding
Please advise if you would like copies of any of the notices referenced above.
Eric
=====================================
|
3,482 |
Subject: Re: CPUC affiliate entity jurisdiction
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8215.
=====================================
Thanks again. Apologies for bothering you over the weekend.
Best,
Jeff
=09"Stephen P. Bowen" <[email protected]>
=0901/07/2001 09:46 PM
=09Please respond to stevebowen
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: Jeffrey Dasovich <[email protected]>, "Dasovich, Jeff"=20
<[email protected]>
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: CPUC affiliate entity jurisdiction
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
Jeff,
Per your request, I am writing a brief note to follow up on our
telephone conversation today. As we discussed, Enron plans to change
the structure of Enron Telecommunications, Inc. from a regular C
corporation to an LLC. As we discussed previously, this change in
structure will require the approval of the California Public Utilities
Commission, because it is a change of control under the definitions of
the Public Utilities Code. You indicated that someone inside Enron was
concerned that, during the course of the CPUC=01,s review of the request
for transfer of control, the CPUC could get access to the books and tax
returns of ETI=01,s parent EBS or other Enron entities, which Enron would
find unattractive. You asked me to discuss whether this was possible.
At a general level, the CPUC in the past has asserted jurisdiction over
entities affiliated with entities regulated by the CPUC. Depending on
the facts at hand, a variety of provisions in the PU Code grant this
jurisdiction. However, the CPUC rarely uses its jurisdiction to look
into the books and tax returns of an affiliate of a nondominant
telecommunications carrier, unless the affiliate is the entity seeking
to acquire control of the carrier. For nondominant telecommunications
carriers, the Commission applies a fairly light regulatory touch,
because such carriers have no market power. You should also be aware
that there are other provisions in the PU Code that protect carrier's
financial information from public disclosure.
Thus, although it is possible that the Commission would seek to review
the books and/or tax returns of EBS or another Enron entity in
connection with the change to an LLC, it is unlikely. ETI is a
nondominant carrier, and there is no real change in the ownership of
ETI, because EBS will still be ETI=01,s owner (i.e., EBS will own an LLC,
rather than a C corporation), nor is there any change in the management
personnel of ETI.
The one wild card is that Enron's name is quite well known to the
Commission because of Enron's presence in the energy market. While this
logically and legally should make no difference, it could conceivably
trigger increased Commission scrutiny of the transfer of control.
Please let me know if you need more information or want to discuss
further.
SPB
=====================================
|
3,483 |
Subject: Governor Davis Announces Recovery Plan for State's Utilities
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3276.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/16/2001 09:16 PM -----
Jean Munoz <[email protected]>
02/16/2001 04:56 PM
To: IEP <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Governor Davis Announces Recovery Plan for State's Utilities
Below is a copy of Governor's press release. Jan will be responding during
the IEP media tele-conference today at 4pm PST. Call in number
1-800-374-2393, pass code: Independent Energy Producers.
Thanks,
Jean
--
Jean Munoz
McNally Temple Associates, Inc.
916-447-8186
916-447-6326 (fx)
___________
PR01: 057
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
02/16/2001 2:20 pm
GOVERNOR DAVIS ANNOUNCES
RECOVERY PLAN FOR STATE'S UTILITIES
SACRAMENTO
Governor Gray Davis today unveiled the framework of a recovery plan for the
California's investor-owned utilities that includes the purchase of their
power lines and targeted revenue from the existing rate structure to help
pay their back debt.
"Today we have begun serious negotiations with the utilities on a balanced
recovery plan," said Governor Davis. "This is a balanced business
transaction. It provides real benefits of real value to consumers and allows
the utilities to get back on their feet."
Elements of the plan include:
* State purchase of the transmission grid owned by the state's three
investor-owned utilities;
* Benefits to ratepayers and taxpayers including:
1. A significant contribution by the parent companies to their utility
subsidiaries to satisfy their creditors and return to financial viability;
2. The extension of cost-based rates from the utilities generating
facilities from five to 10 years and a ban on their sale;
3. Conservation easements on utility-owned land in prime watershed areas;
and
4. Dismissal of all pending litigation.
The Governor's plan directs the Public Utilities Commission to establish a
"dedicated rate component" from the existing rate structure (not a new
charge on consumer bills). This would allow the utilities to make payments
to their creditors, including banks, generators, and renewable energy
producers. Utilities would be allowed to sell revenue bonds secured by the
dedicated rate component.
Governor Davis said he is working closely with the legislative leadership on
legislative components necessary to carry out negotiations.
Governor Davis also noted that he sent a letter to President George W. Bush
thanking him for his order today to expedite the review and licensing of new
power generation facilities in California.
"I am extremely gratified that President Bush has acted to put the federal
government on the same path as I have in California to cut red tape and get
new power plants on line," said the Governor.
###
=====================================
|
3,484 |
Subject: 1st class assignments
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/184.
=====================================
Hi Evening MBA Students:
I wanted to give you an update on First Class Assignments for classes that
begin next week.
See you!
TJ
E203 Finance
The class has its own web page. The URL is:
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/~berk/teaching/E203/E203.html.
You will find the class syllabus (outline) on the web page. Note that there
is a reading assignment for the first lecture. (Professor Berk said that
if you don't have chance to come in to get the book before next week,
that's okay. Just take a look at his syllabus, and then refer to the
lecture notes and drafts from the book he's working on.)
E210 Competitive Strategy
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E220 Corporate Financial Reporting
Please read pages 1-17 and 21-29 in the reader.
E232 Financial Institutions & Markets
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E234 Corporate Finance
Reading assignment: RWJ: Chapter 1.
Reading assignment: RWJ: Chapter 3-5.
E236 Derivatives
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E252 Negotiations
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E259-2 Global Management
Please read the first article in the reader (Hofstede) and the first three
chapters of the book (Trompenaars).
E264 High Tech Marketing
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E268 Branding
Please read Chapter 1 from each of the following texts: "Strategic Brand
Management" by Keller, and "Brand Leadership" by Aaker and Joachimsthaler.
E278 Deals
Please read the introduction to the Masten book.
E283 Real Estate Financing
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E291B-1 Speaking for Management
Sent to you with Back-to-School packet. If you don't have it, please call
Josh at (510) 642-1406 and we can fax it to you.
E291B-2 Diversity Management
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E295 Entrepreneurship
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E296-1 Non-Profit Boards
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E296-2 Business Law
from Managers & the Legal Environment:
chapter 1 - Ethics & the Law (Question 7)
chapter 2 - Constitutional Bases for Business Regulation (Questions 2,6)
chapter 21 - Consumer Protection (Questions 1,4)
E296-3 Technology Sector Literacy
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E296-4 E-Business Supply Chain Management
1. Afuah and Tucci, Chapters 2-5.
2. "A Manager's Primer in Electronic Commerce" by A. Urbaczewski, L.M.
Jessup, and B.C. Wheeler (Business Horizons, September-October 1998).
3. "New Supply Chain Business Models - The Opportunities and Challenges"
by D.L. Anderson and H.L., Lee; ASCET, May 2001,
http://www.ascet.com/documents.asp?d ID=426
E296-5 New Telecom Ventures
None assigned as of 8-23-01.
E296-6 Pricing Strategy & Analysis
Sent to you with Back-to-School packet. If you don't have it, please call
Josh at (510) 642-1406 and we can fax it to you.
=====================================
|
3,485 |
Subject: RE: GSPP on the forefront
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/626.
=====================================
The threshold question is sponsorship, so if you have any ideas I'd appreciate
it. My contacts are all academics/policy people which is of no help at all.
Do you work for Kaufman? What's he like? It sounds like you know about the
position--would it be working with you?
Rob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 11:13 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: GSPP on the forefront
>
>
> Greetings. Hold on, you mean someone's happy being involved with PJM? You
> may be the only one (kidding). Great to hear from. Think it would be a
> great idea to do a forum. My preference would be to bring all of Enron's
> resources (other than cash) to the effort. But we can talk. Be happy to
> get involved. Like to do it sooner rather than later given the atmo (Davis
> has appointed Commissioners Lenin and Trotsky to the California PUC).
>
> You would be THE perfect person for that job, and think you should take it.
> Let's talk more.
>
> Best,
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
> [email protected] on 08/04/2000 08:06:39 AM
>
> To: [email protected]
> cc:
> Subject: GSPP on the forefront
>
>
> > Jeff,
> > How are you? Wild prices and politics out there I gather. I have a
> > question/proposal for you. A major goal that is shared by the GSPP
> alumni
> > board
> > and the school is to host policy forums that attract top academics,
> policy
> > makers, and public attention as not only a good public service, but at
> good PR
> > for the school and its mission. Since electricity deregulation in CA is
> on
> > the
> > front page of all major newspapers this summer, the Dean and I are
> interested
> > in
> > putting together an electricity policy forum. I would need your
> contacts,
> > political sense, and perhaps some financial support from Enron to make
> this
> > work. Do you like the idea and would you be willing to help in some of
> these
> > ways? I think it is in the interest of Enron to advance reasoned debate
> with
> > the backing of the independent/objective GSPP against what is already a
> major
> > emotional/political backlash.
> >
> > On a totally unrelated issue, I spoke with Tim Belden about a position in
> the
> > Enron govt affairs group working with the trading desk. I guess the VP
> for
> > the
> > West, Kaufman, is supposed to call me. If the job is really to
> understand and
> > follow RTO developments and their interaction with energy prices it seems
> a
> > perfect fit with what I've been doing. I told Tim I'm happy where I am
> but
> > the
> > opportunity sounds interesting.
> > Cheers,
> > Rob
> >
> > Rob Gramlich
> > PJM Market Monitoring Unit
> > (610) 666-4291
> > [email protected]
>
>
>
=====================================
|
3,486 |
Subject: RE: CPUC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2635.
=====================================
What happened to the Commission's deference to ongoing legislative efforts to
address direct access?
Thinking out loud: Wood's attempt to ram through an order ending DA may be a
good thing. If he succeeds, doesn't that just prove our point about the
Commission majority's unreasoning hostility to DA? A closure of DA now only
affects those currently offering service and I don't know of anyone doing
that. We need passage of a bill to revive DA one way or another, so that bill
would override the closure order anyway.
And if Wood fails to end DA, because Brown votes with Bilas and Duque,
doesn't that set Wood back on his heels?
Michael Rochman
-----Original Message-----
From: MDay [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:52 PM
To: 'Scott Govenar'; Mark Nobili; MDay; Bev Hansen; Aaron Thomas;
Michael Rochman; Julee Malinowski-Ball; Jeff Dasovich; Susan J Mara;
Jackson Gualco; Karen Mills; Dominic DiMare; Bill Booth; Sandra
McCubbin; Matt Moretti; Keith McCrea; Norm Plotkin; Barbara Barkovich;
Dorothy Rothrock; Delaney Hunter; Wes Larson; Vincent Stewart;
[email protected]; Lance Hastings; [email protected]; Will
Brown; Richard Seguin; Dennis Flatt; Roger Richter; Ken Pietrelli; Les
Spahnn; Chuck Cole; Mike Monagan; Tracy Fairchild; Dave Finigan
Subject: RE: CPUC
The ALJ has confirmed that Commissioner Wood has amended an order about PX
credit modifications to include an end to direct access and placed it on the
agenda.? We do not have access to the proposed order to verify the precise
language.? The order is NOT an order from Commissioner Bilas as the agenda
improperly suggests.? Parties seeking to retain direct access rights should
contact Pres. Lynch and Commission Brown in particular, as well as
Commissioner Duque and Commissioner Bilas.? There is some indication that
Commission Bilas may prepare an alternate omitting the ban on direct access.
Mike Day
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Govenar [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:42 PM
To: Mark Nobili; Mike Day; Bev Hansen; Aaron Thomas; Michael Rochman;
Julee Malinowski-Ball; Jeff Dasovich; Susan J Mara; Jackson Gualco;
Karen Mills; Dominic DiMare; Bill Booth; Sandra McCubbin; Matt Moretti;
Keith McCrea; Norm Plotkin; Barbara Barkovich; Dorothy Rothrock; Delaney
Hunter; Wes Larson; Vincent Stewart; [email protected]; Lance
Hastings; [email protected]; Will Brown; Richard Seguin; Dennis
Flatt; Roger Richter; Ken Pietrelli; Les Spahnn; Chuck Cole; Mike
Monagan; Tracy Fairchild; Dave Finigan
Subject: CPUC
The CPUC is going to consider eliminating direct access at its June 14th
meeting.? Please spread the word accordingly.
=====================================
|
3,487 |
Subject: Senate Hearings
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/254.
=====================================
The Senate Energy Utilities and Communications Committee will take up the
folling items next week pending approval of the Rules Committee:
Tuesday, August 21 - 1:30 p.m.
Informational Hearing: "A Review of DWR's Electricity Rate Agreement"
Wednesday, August 22 - 1:30 p.m.
AB 1233 (Pescetti) This bill would prohibit assessment of local transmission
rates on natural gas if (a) it is delivered to an end-use customer, (b) it
is delivered through a transmission system owned by another entity that is
not interconnected with a local utility transmission system, and (c) it is
blended with gas supplies produced from an in-state source for the purposes
of achieving a usable thermal rate. The bill would require the commission
to administer this provision in a manner that prohibits any cost shift to
core customers resulting from the rate exemption required under the bill.
ABX2 14 (Canciamilla) This bill exempts certain natural gas producers,
suppliers and transporters from the definition of a public utility as
described in Public Utilities Code Sections 216, 222 and 228. Specifically,
this bill; (1) provides that a public utility does not include a gas
producer, supplier or transporter if the gas produced is of insufficient
quality or heating value to make it acceptable for introduction into the gas
line, plant or system of a gas corporation and if the natural gas is not
provided for sale to more than five end users, 2)provides that a "gas
corporation" does not include a producer, supplier or transporter as defined
in item #1 above, 3)provides that a "pipeline corporation" does not include
a producer, supplier or transporter as defined in item #1 above (4)
establishes that entities covered by the exemption from public utility
status as gas suppliers, producers or transporters are subject to
jurisdiction of the CPUC with regard to safety, service quality, and
consumer protection, and
5)requires these exempt entities to apply the public goods charge to end use
customers, as applicable.
ABX2 30 (Dutra) This bill would amend CPUC act to authorize a public entity
to assume from a public utility the work of relocating utilities that
relates to a project of the public entity if the public utility defaults on
executing utility relocation work under a relocation agreement with the
public entity in connection with a transit or transportation capital
improvement project, and would authorize the public entity to issue
contracts with another qualified entity to conduct the utility relocation
work. The bill would require a public utility to reimburse the public entity
for the utility's share of the costs of the relocation work in accordance
with the relocation agreement with the public entity.
=====================================
|
3,488 |
Subject: California Update - 7.23.01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/502.
=====================================
The attached note is from Enron's hired lobbyist in Sacramento. Looks like the only thing that is going to happen will be a Budget without anything on energy restructuring (could continue to change).
There will be some additional negotiating on SBX2 78 over the recess. Enron is looking for a way into those discussions (Jeff Dasovich). We will try to push good language on DA dates and assignment of Utility and CDWR costs.
On another note, CDWR has announced its revenue requirements going forward. The numbers are significantly less than had previously been expected (due to lower costs for spot market purchases). The end result, if their figures are correct, is that the March 27 3c/kwh increase would be sufficient going forward (we are trying to validate). The key is that now the Retained Generation proceedings will determine if any more $ is needed from retail customers.
Thanks,
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: "Scott Govenar" <[email protected]>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Scott+20Govenar+22+20+3Csgovenar+40govadv+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 1:55 PM
To: Sharma, Ban; Leboe, David; Eric Letke; Thome, Jennifer; Ken Smith; Bev Hansen; Hedy Govenar; Buster, Miyung; Guerrero, Janel; Robert Frank; Mike Day; Lawner, Leslie; Kingerski, Harry; Karen Denne; Kean, Steven J.; Alan Comnes; Susan J Mara; Kaufman, Paul; Jeff Dasovich; Steffes, James D.; Rick Shapiro
Subject: MOU UPDATE
For those of you who don't already know, the Senate passed its version of
the SCE MOU, SBX2 78 (Polanco/Sher) which requires users over 500 kw to foot
the bill for SCE's entire undercollection and it eliminates DA completely.
This largely represents TURN's proposal. The Senate also passed a budget
and has since adjourned until August 20.
The Assembly had been considering two MOUs, ABX 82 (Keeley) and ABX 50
(Wright). Both bills had difficulty attracting a majority of votes given
their different approaches to dealing with SCE. ABX 82 for example, had
large users picking up most of the tab for SCE's undercollection whereas ABX
50 split those charges among all users. Both bills provided for some type
of direct access and ABX 82 also provided for a purchase of the transmission
system. In light of the difficulty in passing either bill, it appears as if
the Assembly will shelve both proposals today in order to amend SBX 78 over
the summer break. An internal legislative working group may be formed to
draft amendments but this has not been confirmed. Large users have begun
drafting extensive amendments recognizing that in its current form SBX 78
has very little to offer.
The Assembly will try to pass the final portion of the budget today and
recess until August 20.
=====================================
|
3,489 |
Subject: TheStreet.com wants you to come to Vegas with us...
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4200.
=====================================
As a valued visitor to TheStreet.com, you qualify for
FREE admission to one of the premier investment
conferences in the country, hosted by InterShow:
The Las Vegas Money Show, happening May 14-17, 2001,
at the Bally=01,s and Paris Resorts in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Take advantage of over 200 free workshops and 5 panel
discussions to hone your investing skills.
You=01,ll hear from first-class industry speakers including:
Joseph Battipaglia, Michael Murphy, John Dessauer,
and a Keynote address from Jim Cramer.
Many more will be on-hand to provide you with valuable
investment advice that will allow you to make the
right decisions in today=01,s volatile markets.
There will also be a special pre-show conference
event featuring the Co-Founder of TheStreet.com,
our own Jim Cramer, Market's Commentator for CNBC & TheStreet.com.
Come join Cramer as he shows you how to:
Invest in the Great CEOs from 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm, May 14.
Specifically, you=01,ll learn how to:
? Pick stocks that will result in growth by identifying
companies with top corporate leadership practices
? Devise a clear-cut investment strategy that
shows you how to invest for the reality of wealth --
not the pipe dream of overnight riches
? Understand & effectively utilize time horizons,
diversification & "Buy and Hold" vs. long-term
management concepts to choose the =01+right=01, stocks for
your portfolio
To register exclusively for Jim Cramer:
Investing in the Great CEOs for only $159, please click here,=20
http://www.thestreet.com/z/Sub_Center/subcenter_conference.jhtml
or call TheStreet.com=01,s Customer Service Center
at (800) 562-9571 between the hours of 8am-8pm, EST Monday-Friday.
The Las Vegas Money Show is always a sell-out,
so make your reservation early. Register online
at www.moneyshow.com or call 800/970-4355.
Don=01,t forget to mention priority code #000670
to ensure your free admission to this event.
I look forward to seeing you there!
Sincerely,
Nicole Suresky
Director, Conference Division
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.
If you are not a current or former subscriber, a
nd 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 f
rom us in the future, please click here:
http://www.thestreet.com/z/unsubscribe.jhtml?Type=3DM
=====================================
|
3,490 |
Subject: Re: LighTrade Issue
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2246.
=====================================
All,
To obtain the LighTrade petition and other filed documents, follow these
instructions: Access the DPUC website http://www.state.ct.us/dpuc/. Choose
"docket database" then "active docket database". Next choose "telecom." The
docket number is 00-08-13, but save your self some time by clicking on the
"search" feature. Type in "lightrade" and hit "okay". It will pull up all
that has been filed to date.
Pls. note that I received a call just a few moments ago from the case
coordinator. She informed me that a draft decision has been made and she
will post it within the next hour. It should appear in the same place that I
have described above.
Thanks.
Margo Reyna
Regulatory Analyst
Enron Corp., Government Affairs
Phone: 713-853-9191
----- Forwarded by Margo Reyna/NA/Enron on 12/05/2000 02:20 PM -----
Barbara A Hueter
12/05/2000 02:02 PM
To: Margo Reyna/NA/Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: LighTrade Issue
I am having trouble getting to the document. I get diverted to the commission
website. I go to dockets for telecomm and then I don't know what docket # to
look for. Help.
Margo Reyna
11/28/2000 12:17 PM
To: Lara Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tracy
Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Donald Lassere/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Barbara
A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M
Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Xi Xi/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: LighTrade Issue
I had a conversation yesterday with Brian Fitzgerald, local counsel in CT,
regarding the LighTrade issue. He informed me that LighTrade has been
successful thus far in its argument that it should not be regulated by the
DPUC due to its intent: LighTrade does not intend to provide the actual
bandwidth to customers. Instead, it wants to establish connections between
various points as a service to those companies that sell bandwidth. Brian
has offered to monitor this issue for us. I told him that we would let him
know if we wanted him to do that.
Additionally, please use this link to access the LighTrade petition and other
documents that are posted on the DPUC's website. If you have difficulty with
this link, please let me know.
http://www.dpuc.state.ct.us/DOCKCURR.NSF/f5c4efacb773316a8525664e0049ea32?Sear
chView
I wanted to pass this along in the event you might find this useful.
Thanks.
Margo Reyna
Regulatory Analyst
Enron Corp., Government Affairs
Phone: 713-853-9191
=====================================
|
3,491 |
Subject: RE: FW: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v.
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11293.
=====================================
Hmmm. FYI. Dear old Edison.
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/19/2001 02:55 PM -----
Rebecca W Cantrell@ECT
04/19/2001 02:42 PM
To: Barry Tycholiz/NA/Enron@ENRON, Colleen Sullivan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna
Greif/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ed McMichael/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jane M Tholt/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Patti Sullivan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Randall L
Gay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger O Ponce/HOU/EES@EES,
Stephanie Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Suzanne
Calcagno/NA/Enron@Enron, Tori Kuykendall/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: RE: FW: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v.
El Paso Natural Gas Company, et al., Docket No. RP00-241-000
FYI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT on 04/19/2001
02:38 PM ---------------------------
From: Shelley Corman/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/19/2001 10:16 AM
To: Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: RE: FW: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El
Paso Natural Gas Company, et al., Docket No. RP00-241-000
Yes,
It had by shipper, by contract level info. -- the type of info available on
our transactional reports. There is a protective order in place in the
proceeding, so I don't believe the information is generally available. We
did not ask for confidential treatment -- but we did excise rate information
for periods prior to Sept. 2000 (the date that this info started appearing on
our transactional reports).
-----Original Message-----
From: Cantrell, Rebecca
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 9:55 AM
To: Corman, Shelley
Cc: Lawner, Leslie
Subject: Re: FW: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El
Paso Natural Gas Company, et al., Docket No. RP00-241-000
Shelley, how detailed was the information provided? Was it broken down by
shipper? Also, did you request confidential treatment?
From: Shelley Corman/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/19/2001 09:32 AM
To: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FW: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El
Paso Natural Gas Company, et al., Docket No. RP00-241-000
FYI
Judge Wagner issued a subpoena to Transwestern and several other pipelines in
the referenced proceeding at SoCal Edison's request. The request sought
information on scheduled, actual and contracts quantities to the California
border for the time period 1997 to present. While we are not a party in the
case, we decided to cooperate in the proceeding and not file a motion to
quash. We responded yesterday.
=====================================
|
3,492 |
Subject: Re: news/updates
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3584.
=====================================
Greetings Mark:
Here is the latest.
ENA signed a short-term deal (5 -week term, I believe) with DWR that goes
through the end of the month, at which time we have the option to extend the
deal to a five-year term. We are discussing other longer-term deals, too.
As Steve points out, we've had serious concerns regarding DWR's
creditworthiness. (DWR, the Dept. of Water Resources, is the state agency
that Davis made the purchaser of power when the utilities hit the financial
skids a few months ago and the market stopped selling them power.)
The problem has been simple and significant---while our brilliant Governor
and Legislature gave DWR the authority to buy power on behalf of the
cash-strapped utilities, they neglected to t spell out how DWR would recover
its costs of buying the power.
Based on comments from us and other suppliers regarding the creditworthiness
issue, the California PUC issued an order last week establishing that 1) the
PUC would indeed pass DWR's power costs through to ratepayers and 2) the PUC
would NOT second-guess (i.e., impose "reasonabless" standards) on any
contracts signed by DWR as a condition of passing the costs through to
ratepayers.
With the CPUC decision (and other language that ENA's negotiated into the DWR
contract), ENA is close to being comfortable signing the 5-year deal, even in
the face of the FERC order. That's predominantly due to the fact that the
power price in the 5-year deal would come in well under the $150/MWH
threshold that FERC has set up for any sort of "refund review." But other
things could crop up between now and the exercise date that could muck things
up. I'll keep you posted on developments as they transpire.
The big problem (as Steve notes) is that the State is on the verge of (some
say hell bent on) taking over the entire electricity industry in California
in perpetuity. Our original proposal focused on getting price volatility and
the utilities' financial position back under control. Our contracting
proposals have always been couched in the context of a temporary, stop-gap
measure. That is, the state would do the minimum amount needed via contracts
to stabilize prices while simultaneoulsly doing what was necessary to get
de-regulation back on track in California. And once the situation had been
righted, the State would as soon as possible exit the industry and let the
market step back in. Unfortunately, command-and-control, anti-deregulation
policymakers have taken hold of the agenda (with the blessing, seemingly, of
the Governor), and are moving the state toward a "takeover" response. That's
what we're actively opposing.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,493 |
Subject: NEWS: Workshop on Governor's Rate Design
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4313.
=====================================
* Yesterday meeting
---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES on 04/13/2001
10:34 AM ---------------------------
JBennett <[email protected]> on 04/12/2001 04:32:15 PM
Today a workshop was held over at the Commission in order to explain /
discuss Governor Davis' rate design proposal. It is unclear as to how the
Governor's proposal will factor into the rate design hearings which are now
scheduled for next week. Specifically, the issue as to whether there will
be someone sponsoring the proposal (i.e., subject to cross examination),
whether workpapers will be provided, whether the proposal will be put in the
standardized template form that other parties are using, were discussed --
but with no resolution.
From what I could discern from the workshop, the Governor's proposal was
crafted as follows:
It was first determined, with respect to each UDC, what the overall rate
increase on the generation component of their respective rates should be.
Thus, for PG&E, the average increase (across all customer classes/ groups)
is to be 44%; for SCE the average increase is to be 32% and for SDG&E the
average increase is to be 44%
Having determined the average across the board rate increase, the next step
was to begin looking a the usage of different customer classes. Based on
this analysis, the revenue to be derived from the rate increase was
allocated 1/3 to residential and 2/3 to commercial and industrial.
Looking next at residential, the Governor's plan created three tiers: (1)
130% of baseline and less (2) 130-200 of baseline and (3) over 200% of
baseline. The first tier, gets no increase. For PG&E the average increase
on the total bill for the 2nd tier is 28% ( 25% for SEC),with the average
increase on the total bill for above 200% being 37% (32% for SCE).
For Commercial/Industrial classes, a division was made between time of use
customers and non time of use customers.
PG&E will have an average increase of 30% on total time of use (this equates
to a zero increase for off peak usage and a 50% increase for mid peak and
on-peak usage. For SCE the average overall increase for TOU is 32% (with
zero increase for off peak and 40% increase for mid peak and on peak). For
non TOU customers the average rate increase on the PG&E system will be 29%
(23% for SCE).
Asked as to whether the rate increase was applicable to DA customers,the
response was that such was a policy question that had yet to be determined.
The analysis reflected in the rate design proposal did nothing, however, to
segregate out DA customers.
I will fax the hand out given out at the workshop to Jeff Dasovich and
Harry Kingerski. If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Jeanne Bennett
=====================================
|
3,494 |
Subject: Re: glossary revision
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5923.
=====================================
Andy -- great job. A few small edits.
Bob
At 07:40 PM 1/3/01 -0800, Andy Brown wrote:
>ABB suggested revisions of the glossary in MS Word redline. 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 5:53 PM
>To: Anne Kelly; Bev Hansen; Cary Rudman; Chuck Cole; Delany Hunter; DJ
>Smith; Hedy Govenar; Jamie Parker; Jan Smutny-Jones; Jean Munoz; Jen
>Paulsen; John Larrea; Julee Malinowski-Ball; Kassandra Gough; Katie
>Kaplan; marie moretti; Maureen OHaren; McNally Ray; Mike Monagan; Norton
>Kelli; Phil Isenberg; Robert Ross; Ron Tom; Scott Govenar; Susan Mccabe;
>Tom Ross
>Cc: Carol H Hudson; Steven Kelly; Douglas Kerner; Andy Brown; B Brown
>Andy; Baker Carolyn; Bob Weisenmiller; Curtis Kebler; Greg Blue; Jeff
>Dasovich; Joe Ronan; John Stout; Karen Edson; kent Palmerton; Kristin
>Vellandi; Lynn Lednicky; Marty Wilson; Paula Hall-Collins; Pigott Jack;
>Richard Hyde; Rob Lamkin; Stephanie-Newell; Sue Mara
>Subject: Here is the Energy briefing agenda for the Republican Caucus
>and FAQ
>Importance: High
>
>
>Greetings:
>For those of you attending the Republican Caucus briefing tomorrow it is in
>room 126 and runs from 9-noon (from what we understand it will be close
>quarters so arrive early if you have been invited to speak). This meeting is
>open to those who have been invited only.
>
>Attached please find the agenda. IEP will be handing out the Seeing the
>Light document, Power Up, and the editorial from the Bee today. We will be
>following up with the FAQ's with a letter to each attendee on Friday.
>
>I have also attached the Final FAQ and Glossary of Terms. Please let us
>know by 2:00 tomorrow if you have any changes or additions to these
>documents.
>
>Thanks!
>Katie Kaplan
>Manager of State Policy Affairs
>Independent Energy Producers Association
>(916) 448-9499
>
>
- abb rbwrev.Glossary of Terms.doc
=====================================
|
3,495 |
Subject: FW: Adjustment Bid Market Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4987.
=====================================
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Heinrich
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 4:17 PM
> To: Jacqlynn Wu
> Subject: Adjustment Bid Market Update
>
> <<...>>
>
> 5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 522
> Santa Clara, CA 95054
> 408 517-2100
> 408 517-2985 fax
>
>
> March 12, 2001
>
>
> Dear Colleague,
>
> Thank you for your participation and support in resolving our problems
> this summer regarding congestion management in the California market. As
> we have indicated, we believe that this problem is costing us millions of
> dollars today and continued pro rata schedule cuts as a method of
> congestion management will continue to reduce energy supply this summer
> and escalate substantially to well over $100,000,000 in replacement energy
> costs.
>
> As you suggested, we presented our solution of operating an adjustment bid
> market to manage congestion to the CAISO Board of Governors on February
> 28, 2001. Following that meeting we were requested to work with the CAISO
> staff to develop a resolution to be presented at the next Board meeting on
> March 15, 2001. The CAISO staff will be presenting their solution
> described as "Market Stabilization Plan/Interim Market Redesign" in a
> effort to resolve this and other problems.
>
> While the CAISO plan may have long-term benefits, it has been brought
> forward without the benefit of full stakeholder airing and we believe that
> it will be difficult to complete all software and systems work in time to
> have benefit this summer. In addition, it will require significant
> participant re-education. We are also very concerned about the amount of
> time remaining to complete this process along with the risks and costs
> associated with its implementation. Therefore, APX will finalize its
> offer for the solution that we described to you on February 21 as an
> alternative to the CAISO staff plan during the upcoming CAISO Board of
> Governors meeting. We know that our solution can be implemented in time,
> that it will improve adequate supply and that it will save millions of
> dollars this summer.
>
> We have heard from many of you that you support this market as a viable
> way of mitigating the high cost of congestion in the coming months. WE ARE
> ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS PLAN WITH the CAISO Board of Governors on
> March 15, 2001.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Michael L. Heinrich John Stremel
> Vice President Vice President
> Automated Power Exchange Automated Power Exchange
>
>
> Mike
> Michael L. Heinrich
> Vice President
> Automated Power Exchange
> 5201 Great America Parkway
> Suite 522
> Santa Clara, CA 95054
> 408-517-2100
> Direct: 408-517-2159
> Mobile: 408-393-1092
> e-mail: [email protected]
> www.apx.com
>
>
=====================================
|
3,496 |
Subject: CFEE contributions levels
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2080.
=====================================
Dear Jeff,
Hope I didn't get this to you too late. Had a fascinating lunch with
the new CEO of Southern Energy California. Her name is Ann Cleary and I
think you would like her, as much as one can like one's competitors, as
she is very knowledgeable, hands on, and articulate. She will be a good
board member for Southern.
Here's the deal:
The basic "corporate contribution" level is $15,000 per year for all
contributing members of the board. This entitles the members to be on
the steering committees and have a seat at the table for all
conferences. The conferences include our standard roundtable
discussions with state legislators and regulators on electricity, gas,
air quality, water, telecommunicaoins and public infrastructure. We
have also instituted a "six caucus day" which brings leadership from the
six California legislative caucuses (Dem and Rep from Assembly, Senate,
and Congressional delegation) together for a series of bipartisan
California strategy sessions which facilitates federal/state cooperation
and coordination on a wide variety of California issues. (Essentially,
the best of the Washington trip without all the time, expense,and social
events). This event is in late January of each year, starting in 2001,
and involves a social evening, followed by a day of 1-2 hour strategy
sessions among participants of the six caucuses and CFEE board members.
In order to be able to accompany the members of the legislature and
regulatory agencies on the international study travel projects, the
level of board contribution must be $30,000 per year, every year,
regardless of whether or not the company sends a representative or is
interested in the trip subject matter. If the company picks and chooses
which year it want to go, the FPPC regs make the "gift" of the trip from
the company, not CFEE. So far, Enron has participated in most, not all,
trips, but pays $30K each year and the gift of the trip to the members
is from CFEE, reportable, but not a violation of the gift limit.
Up until this year we had another category of participation, which was
"pay as go." These were non-board members who wrote checks of up to
$7,500 to $10,000 per conference they attended. We have decided as a
board to abandon that method and concentrate on the board members as the
primary audience for the conferences. We will still bring in outside
members at that rate, but we are gearing the conferences for board
members and funding them with additional pro-rate share for cost only.
The idea is to make the conferences smaller, more intimate, more hard
hitting, and hopefully more productive for the board.
Hope this is what you needed. Good luck and let me know how it is
going.
Pat Mason
[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,497 |
Subject: CSFB report
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3007.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/25/2001 09:47 AM -----
Michael Tribolet
01/25/2001 09:08 AM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F
Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES,
Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, Travis McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie
Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected],
[email protected]
cc:
Subject: CSFB report
FYI
Credit Suisse First Boston <[email protected]>
01/25/2001 07:33 AM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Governor Gives Limited Information on Auction
Credit Suisse First Boston
Paul Patterson
Good morning,
Here are some of the recent developments in the California power crisis:
? Yesterday evening, Governor Davis revealed preliminary results of the DWR's
auction for long-term forward power contracts. 39 bidders participated, with
an average weighted bid of $0.069 per kWh excluding "Super Peak" periods.
? However, the governor did not discuss the quantity of power actually bid,
the breakdown between offers for base-load, peak, and off-peak power, or
provisions for ancillary services. In our opinion, these are exceedingly
important issues that need to be known to adequately determine the "success"
of any auction.
? Republican Assembly leader Bill Campbell is reportedly working on an
alternative bill to Speaker Hertzberg's proposed bill. Reportedly Campbell's
bill would call for the state to arrange long-term contracts for the
utilities, in exchange for the option to purchase ownership stakes.
? We believe that the actual results of the long-term contract auctions
should be a key point of focus for investors and may help determine what
headroom, if any, the utilities could have. We believe that investors should
remain aware of the high risk still associated with shares of PCG ($9.94,
Hold) and EIX ($9.63, Hold).
Paul Patterson, 212-325-5876
Neil Stein, 212-325-4217
Wen-Wen Chen, 212-538-0223
Emily Lao Chua, 212-325-1982
----------------------------------------------
If you would prefer not to receive further messages from this sender, please
click on the following e-mail link and send a message with or without any
text:
Mailto:[email protected]
You will receive one additional e-mail message confirming your removal
- ppp012501.pdf
=====================================
|
3,498 |
Subject: RE: Final date and time, we have competition
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1489.
=====================================
I am available for a conference call 9/18 at 5PM eastern.
What concerns me about the competition is that their publicity is already
out, even though their date is 3 weeks after ours. We have to get ours out,
and that commits us to a hefty expenditure. While we have lots of
encouragement, we have practically no firm commitments of financial
sponsorship or speaker acceptances. We need both ASAP.
I have heard of no turndowns either of financial sponsors or of speakers,
but we need to secure the commitments. I think Loretta Lynch has confirmed,
as has Phil Harris. I am expecting a confirm from Stephen Littlechild
through Severin. I am awaiting a preliminary response about John Bryson. I
have not heard anything about any of the other speakers we agreed to seek,
so if any of you have information about these please pass it along.
Assuming we get a good "core" of our top picks for speakers, I am hoping
that we can get firm financial commitments from our loyal backers to give us
the "core" financial support that makes doing all of this possible.
Looking for more good news,
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 4:06 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Final date and time, we have competition
All,
A few of you might have been testifying at the FERC hearings in San Diego, I
know Jeff was, so you know that most people wanted FERC to "do something."
The
silver lining in that proposal is that our conference becomes more
important.
Lee has decided on 12:30 to 6 pm on Monday November 13 so you can tell any
speakers you are inviting. I think that's the best choice because it more
interesting to more people, and if they can do presidential debates in 2
hours
we should be able to address these issues in 6 hours.
Note that we have competition with another conference, see below. We should
be
able to get better, higher profile speakers. We need to get a list soon so
we
can send out advertisements. Please send updates to Lee and me. Expect
another
message asking for reactions to a proposed next set of speakers to invite.
If
you want to be on a voluntary conference call addressing the next speakers,
followed by an even more optional discussion on logistics with Heather, tell
me
if Monday 9/18 at 5pm EDT/2 pm Pacific works for you.
Lee, if you want to send this to the other potential sponsors you're talking
to,
feel free.
Thanks!
Rob
<<PMW conference.pdf>>
Rob Gramlich
PJM Market Monitoring Unit
(610) 666-4291
[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,499 |
Subject: Re: California Rate Assessment (371.35)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5050.
=====================================
Bill,
In light of the response below, let's change gears. In lieu of preparing the
three scenarios previously requested, what we would like to do at the 12:30
pm PSTconference call, in addition to a general discussion of the results of
your original analysis, we would like you to modify the study with regard to
the following 3 issues; 1) Assume that SB47X is not implemented, 2) Utilize a
9% discount rate, and 3) Assume a dry season as most likely case. It is our
hope that you will be able to complete that analysis in time for the call.
Please express the results in terms of cents/kwh and percentage increase over
existing commercial/industrial rates.
Thanks. Look forward to speaking with you later.
Robert
"Bill Monsen" <[email protected]>
03/06/2001 10:31 PM
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: California Rate Assessment (371.35)
Robert,
Thanks for the note. A conference call at 12:30 pm PST would work for us.
However, on that call, we will not be able to present results of the
additional scenarios that you defined in your e-mail. The model that we
used was an annual rate model. The analysis that you are proposing would
require a monthly model, which would take additional time to develop.
Perhaps we should discuss this prior to the call at 2:30 pm CST. Roger and
I will give you a call when we get into the office on Wednesday morning.
This should be around 11 am CST.
Best regards,
Bill
At 05:32 PM 3/6/01 , [email protected] wrote:
>Bill and Roger,
>
>Thanks for the quick turn-around on the analysis. I hope the weekend was
>not totally ruined. After review of the study, we thought it would be
>useful to further expand the scenarios into a Worst, Base and Best Case.
>The scenarios we would like you to run are outlined in the attached file.
>Each scenario would reflect a wet, dry and normal weather case.
>Please note that each scenario has a different date for surcharge
>implementation. The Best Case reflects the date included in your original
>analysis. Along those lines, would you please expand on the rationale for
>assuming the 1/01/02 implementation date.
>
>In addition to reflecting the rate impact on a cents per kwh basis, please
>include a percent impact as well.
>
>Like our original request, we are on a fast-track. We would like to
>schedule a conference call for 2:30 p.m. central time Wednesday (March 7)
>to discuss the results of your analysis. Hopefully, the data you have
>already generated can be quickly "massaged" to accomodate the scenarios
>requested.
>
>Please call me at 713 853 3170 if you have any questions.
>
>Robert
>
>(See attached file: California Rate Scenarios.doc)
=====================================
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.