dataset_id
int64 0
5.47k
| email_body
stringlengths 800
9.73k
|
|---|---|
3,600 |
Subject: RE: Concept for core/noncore Analysis for California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12333.
=====================================
One comments, as the DWR projections indicate, their price projection of spot
(non-contracted) is not where the enter into their contracted amounts (notice
non-contracted stays above contracted). Thus you do not see an MTM
reduction over time.
-----Original Message-----
From: Soo, Jeffrey A.
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 8:25 AM
To: Tribolet, Michael; Steffes, James; Dasovich, Jeff
Cc: Neustaedter, Robert; Brown, Kortney; Black, Don; Lewis, James C.;
Shapiro, Richard
Subject: RE: Concept for core/noncore Analysis for California
<< File: MTMcalc.xls >>
Attached is the workup detailing the DWR figures below.
JS
-----Original Message-----
From: Tribolet, Michael
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 7:07 AM
To: Steffes, James; Dasovich, Jeff
Cc: Neustaedter, Robert; Brown, Kortney; Soo, Jeffrey A.; Black, Don; Lewis,
James C.; Shapiro, Richard
Subject: RE: Concept for core/noncore Analysis for California
All:
One thing to note is that while the DWR contracts are blended with the core,
the non-core, if our curve come to be true, would enjoy the back end of the
curve's lower price path.
We calculated, based on the DWR's figures, the negative mark-to-maket at the
various points in time:
6/02 $4.2B
12/02 $5.8B
6/03 $7.0B
While our curves differ, this gives an order of magnitute.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 6:45 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Cc: Neustaedter, Robert; Brown, Kortney; Soo, Jeffrey A.; Tribolet, Michael;
Black, Don; Lewis, James C.
Subject: Concept for core/noncore Analysis for California
Looks good with me.
Jim
From: Jeff Dasovich on 05/10/2001 04:02 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert
Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Kortney
Brown/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeffrey A Soo/Enron@EnronXGate, Michael
Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: Concept for core/noncore Analysis
OK, I apologize, I've been trying to lock myself to the computer and crunch
some #'s, but can't seem to get control of my schedule. Wanted to lay out
the core/noncore model that's been pitched (and that CMA showed keen interest
in this morning) to see if we're all on the same page; but perhaps this is
the analysis that you're already working on:
Split takes place either 1.1.03 or 6.1.03.
Core and noncore are responsible for the "DWR past purchases" (spread over 15
years).
Core will keep IOU gen, QFs and DWR contracts (which would eliminate the
short for the core)
Noncore, in return for giving up the lucrative IOU gen, effectively accepts
the short position (i.e., goes to market) AND does not get sacked with DWR's
going forward costs (with "forward costs" defined as all power costs
attributable to the "post-core/noncore" transition date.
Let me know if this tracks with where we're headed. Thanks.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,601 |
Subject: SBX 9 (Elimination of Standby Charges)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10050.
=====================================
The Distributed Energy Resources industry won a major battle yesterday.? The
California Senate Energy and Utilities Committee passed on a 7-0 bipartisan
vote, Sen. Morrow's (and while her name wasn't on this bill,?it was as much
Sen. Alpert's) bill on eliminating any tariff that discriminates against
DER.? SBX 9 was derived from the omnibus DER bill SBX 35 which is still
alive and contains many important provisions fro removing additional
barriers.? Yesterday's vote represents a major win because even if the bill
ultimately does not get enacted, a very important statement has been made by
the committee.? I'm sure the CPUC will take notice in their proceedings.
?
The DER community owes much thanks to Sen.'s Morrow and Alpert, and the
Utilities Committee Members and their staffs:
Sen. Bowen (Chair)
Sen. Alarcon
Sen. Battin
Sen. Dunn
Sen. Murray
Sen. Poochigian
Sen. Sher
Sen. Speier
Sen. Vasconcellos
Sen. Vincent
?
Also much thanks to everyone who worked incredibly hard and diligently on
this effort.? From the business, consumer advocacy, environmental,
government, manufacturing, and real estate communities.
?
Here are the highlights of yesterday's actions:
?
For IOU's- No discriminatory tariffs for new DER installed between May 1,
2000 and June 1, 2003 if DER is in combined heat and power mode.? If you
have a peaking unit with gen only, then you have until??July 1 2001, to get
it installed.?
DER installed within the window gets the exemption until June 1, 2011.
The maximum capacity of the DER is 5 MW in aggregate per site.
The DER must have emissions levels of 9 PPM or better until the ARB
established new guidelines and standards, expected late this year or early
next year.
Customers with DER are still required to pay interconnection, public purpose
charges, and obligations incurred under the Dept. of Water Resources energy
purchases program.
The CPUC shall require the electrical corporations to include non-utility
owned DER in its planning process.
The CPUC is required to establish a firewall so that in the event that the
implementation of DER results in net costs to the system, those costs stay
within the customer class.
The CPUC shall require the utilities to establish new rates for DER that are
non-discriminatory and take into account the benefits as well as the costs.
Muni's are required to review their tariffs for barriers to entry and hold
public meetings to solicit comment for recommended changes.
Now we have momentum, but there is still a tremendous amount of work to do
on the Assembly side and with Governor's office.? We need the continued
(increased) support of all of you as we move this forward.
Steven A. Greenberg
RealEnergy, Inc.
300 Capitol Mall, Suite 120
Sacramento, CA 95814
916-325-2500
mailto:[email protected]
www.realenergy.com
?
=====================================
|
3,602 |
Subject: Jobs for Haas Alumni 4/27/01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: []
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11772.
=====================================
ALL ARE WELCOME TO ATTEND
Post MBA, Post Internet Start-Up Career Decisions 2001 Joint program Univ.
Mich. alumni, Haas alumni
$25 at the door. Please RSVP [email protected]
Panel topic questions:
o What short and long-term trends can be expected in Bay Area job
market for director level and above, executive candidates?
o What are up and coming industries or fields in the Bay Area job
market. How can those jobs best be accessed?
o Assume a job candidate has experience at Internet start-up
companies, perhaps several over the past 2 years. How should Internet
start-up experience be leveraged towards next career decision? How should
this experience be presented to next potential employer, especially if the
companies went out of business? Will candidates be penalized if they have
jumped from Internet start-up to Internet start-up over the past several=20
years?
o How does the job market of San Francisco compare to that of Silicon
Valley/South Bay? Is it worth it for residents of San Francisco to commute
or relocate to Silicon Valley/South Bay?
o What skills or experiences are necessary to make the jump from
senior director level to vice president? From vice president to COO?
o In the past few years there was a glut of senior job titles at
start-up companies. Do you believe some people will have to downgrade their
title in their next career moves?
o Assume a job candidate has received an MBA degree from a top
ranking school 5 years ago and has successfully progressed up an executive
level management career. At that point, what is the relative importance of
the MBA on the resume, versus the experience and accomplishments?
Target Audience:
MBA Graduates and soon to be graduates
From University of Michigan, Haas School of Business, Kellogg, UT Austin,
Tuck. Other MBA alumni clubs invited. Director to Vice President Career
Level, mostly high tech and software related fields
Panel Members:
o John Morel, Associate Director alumni Career Services Haas School
of Business
o Craig Smith, Consultant, Heidrick & Struggles,
o Brian McDugal, Vice President, Management Solutions,
o Margaret Steen, Careers Reporter, San Jose Mercury News,
o Moderator: Gretchen Alarcon, Director of Human Resources, Icarian,
Inc. (UMBS MBA 1997),
Date and Time:
Wednesday, May 2nd
Networking reception 6:00 p.m.
Panel presentation 7:00 pm
Location:
Scores Restaurant Conference Center
2200 Bridgepointe Parkway in San Mateo
650-357-1998
Directions:
Take Highway 101(or 280) to Highway 92 East before the San Mateo Bridge.
Exit Mariner=01,s Island Blvd. ramp. Make a right turn at the light onto
Mariner=01,s Island Blvd. Make a right at next light onto Fashion Island Bl=
vd.
Follow into Bridgepointe Center at 2200 Bridgepointe Parkway. Free parking.
Event Contact Person:
Christine Mohan, 415-440-3367
=====================================
|
3,603 |
Subject: RE: AReM response to Wood ACR
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1505.
=====================================
Good draft. Few comments:
* As much as we may not like it, the commission is where the
action is right now, and we're going to have to work with them. As
such, I think the comments would be significantly more effective if you
go through the document and edit out the invective and other highly
charged adjectives, which, while therapeutic, tend to incent the
Commission to ignore or be even more hostile to our interests. In short,
I don't see an upside to it and there is downside. Rather than try to
edit, I've simply compiled those paragraphs that in my view should be
deleted or require serious toning-down. In addition to these specific
areas, I would recommend going through the document and toning it down
generally.
* Seems that it would be useful, up front and at the end, to give
OUR answer (maybe I'm repeating Jim's comments here): e.g., The
Commission should 1) not do retroactive, 2) permit customers to do what
the contracts permit (e.g., add facilities, renew, etc.), 3) hold
hearings on all of Wood's unsubstantiated assertions, and 4) anything
else we want to be part of the solution as it relates to the issues
raised by Karl.
* On page 2, do we run the risk of affirming what Angelides and
others are saying, i.e., that DA could bankrupt the state? Sure we need
to say it, since it seems to play into their spin and everyone already
knows of the bind they're in? Could backfire.
* Point # 6 on page 14: are we inviting the Commission to ask
parties to submit contracts? Possible to re-write or eliminate this so
that it doesn't appear we're advocating having folks submit them?
Good job. Thanks for your efforts. Seems that the key thing is to let
the Commission know unequivocally that it must hold extensive hearings
on the many factual issues in dispute.
Best,
Jeff
<<Language to delete or edit.doc>>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Mara, Susan" <[email protected]>@ENRON
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 10:52 AM
> To: MDay; Dan Douglass; Sue Mara at Enron SF; Jeff Dasovich Enron SF
> Cc: JBennett
> Subject: RE: AReM response to Wood ACR
>
> Here's the 2nd draft from yesterday with my comments. Dan is working
> on
> the final now.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MDay [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 6:00 PM
> To: 'Dan Douglass'; 'Sue Mara at Enron SF'; 'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'
> Cc: JBennett
> Subject: AReM response to Wood ACR
>
>
> Dan, is it possible to see the AReM response to the Wood ACR before it
> is
> filed tomorrow? I am going to be preparing the written prehearing
> conference statement for Enron to be submitted to Barnett at the nov.
> 7
> PHC
> and I want to make sure we are being consistent in our approach.
> Thank
> you.
> Mike Day
> - 11-2-01 Joint Comments - Draft 2-sue.doc << File: 11-2-01 Joint
> Comments - Draft 2-sue.doc >>
- Language to delete or edit.doc
=====================================
|
3,604 |
Subject: Re: Message points for WGA effort.
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8510.
=====================================
I think a key point is that the California legislature and CPUC implicitly
put themselves in the position as "procurement managers" for California
consumers. They did this in two ways:
Forced utilities to go short by selling a minimum of 50% of their thermal
generation (the utilities chose to sell more and the CPUC approved it).
Steve Peace and many California politicians claimed that they sold these
assets at ridiculously high prices.
Required utilities to buy all of their needs (at least at first, then most of
their needs when the Block Forward Market opened) from the spot market. They
explicitly chose to take a huge short position into the spot market every day.
These two basic facts led to a variety of unintended consequences:
Utilities had no incentive, in fact would have to be irrational risk seekers,
to purchase forward. All activitiy measured against peak index (same problem
plagues their gas market). After the summer of 1999 when utilities made
modest Block Forward purchases at prices higher than the spot market
liquidated the CPUC played Monday morning quarterback and threatened prudency
review.
Huge spot market purchasing requirement causes utilities to take large short
positions into real time, creating reliability problems.
Lack of forward buying signals dampened the asset developement efforts.
Developers looked at low spot prices in 1998 and 1999 and invested capital
elsewhere in the country (e.g., Enron's peaking plants). Meanwhile
tremendous demand existed, but was masked by years of strong hydro and a
summer of mild weather. In 2000 when the demand showed up, it was too late.
Had utilities tried to hedge forward, the forward price would have move up
modestly, causing increased investment in generation. With reasonable siting
rules and forward purchasing by the utilities we could have built significant
generation to meet the 2001 summer season.
Fundamental shortage combined with huge spot market demand caused prices in
California, and the rest of the west, to increase.
California didn't deregulate, they made a strategic bet to go short! Once
they made this strategic bet, they "fired" the traditional portfolio manager
-- the utilities -- and hired the CalPX spot market to meet all of their
needs. They then let the ship sail with nobody at the helm. Deregulation
didn't fail; the State of California has simply proven to be a horribly
irresponsible portfolio manager.
Other versions of a true deregulated market can work. Protection for small
consumers can be achieved by establishing a default provider or specifying a
portfolio approach. Asset divestitures can work with a contract from the
buyer guaranteeing supply for a few years (this is what happened in MT which
is why industrial customers are hurting there and small customers have been
protected by a 3 year purchase contract).
=====================================
|
3,605 |
Subject: FW: Sempra OII
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3186.
=====================================
Jeff - Here is a synopsis of the Sempra OII.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cherry, Brian
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 8:16 AM
> To: Cherry, Brian; Williams, Ray; Johnson, Kirk; Thomas,
> Dan (CGT Dir); Katz, Michael; Campbell, Benjamin; Bellenger, Geoffrey;
> Berkovitz, Trista; Gee, Dennis; Buchner, Les; Lindh, Frank (Law);
> Litteneker, Randall (Law); Niven, Andrew (Law); Sivley, Paul; McLafferty,
> Daniel; Lieu, Lisa; Anderson, David W (Law)
> Cc: Guliasi, Les
> Subject: Sempra OII
>
>
> Yesterday, the Commission issued an OII to determine the
> adequacy of Sempra Energy's, SoCalGas' and SDG&E's gas transmission
> practices and to determine what measures need to be taken to correct any
> deficiencies. The OII orders the Sempra affiliates and parent to
> demonstrate that SDG&E's gas supply and transmission system are adequate
> to provide service to present and future core and noncore customers.
>
> As you may recall, the OII sprang from an AL that SDG&E
> filed in August requesting emergency review and approval of its proposals
> to temporarily revise gas transportation service elections to its noncore
> customers. SDG&E subsequently pulled the advice letter after the
> Commission issued a resolution rejecting it and outlined an OII it was
> going to issue on this matter. The language in the OII that was issued
> yesterday is substantially similar to that which was in the Commission's
> original draft resolution.
>
> The Sempra companies have been ordered to appear at a soon
> to be determined PHC to show cause and demonstrate that:
>
> 1. SDG&E has adequate gas transmission supply for the
> 2000/2001 winter heating season, as well as the longer term supply
> throughout the year. If supply is inadequate, SDG&E shall submit plans
> for obtaining adequate supply.
> 2. SDG&E gas and transmission supply is adequate to meet
> anticipated need for gas fired generation. If not, SDG&E shall submit
> plans for obtaining adequate supply.
> 3. SDG&E's gas transmission service is not being adversely
> affected by interests of its corporate affiliate.
> 4. Recently added demands on SDG&E's capacity are not
> negatively impacting supply for SDG&E's customers. and otherwise
> consistent with representations made to the Commission.
> 5. SDG&E's current gas curtailment rules are just and
> reasonable; if not, SDG&E shall propose changes.
>
> We are going to need to keep a careful eye on this
> proceeding as it develops to make sure it stays focused on events in
> southern California. Commission Bilas gave me assurances last week before
> the OII was issued that it was a Sempra problem, not a statewide problem.
> However, given everyone's sensitivities to EG concerns, its a proceeding
> that could easily be expanded beyond its current narrow focus. I'll
> forward you all a copy of the order later today.
>
=====================================
|
3,606 |
Subject: FW: MEDIA GROK: Mutiny on the Good Ship Lucent
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1113.
=====================================
THIS IS WHERE YOU SHOULD WORK WHEN YOU GRADUATE!! CONTACT THEM
IMMEDIATELY!!!!
Cameron Sellers
Vice President, Business Development
PERFECT.COM
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: TheStandard.com [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 8:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: MEDIA GROK: Mutiny on the Good Ship Lucent
Groovin' Peer-to-Peer
They may not be able to tell you what it is, exactly, but they agree it's
going to be really big.
The man who invented Lotus Notes is back in the news after three years in
deep stealth mode with his new company, Groove Networks. Groove will be
taking the wraps off today at Internet World, and outlets ran stories about
Ray Ozzie's new thing. It's a platform for peer-to-peer communications - so
the reporters describing it sounded collectively like the blind men with the
elephant. Among the sound bites they collected from analysts: "Ray Ozzie is
Napsterizing Notes" (Michael Schrage in the New York Times); "This could be
the next killer application for the Internet" (Esther Dyson in the Wall
Street Journal); "Has the potential of being the AOL instant messaging of
the business community" (David Marshak in the Boston Globe).
Most outlets waited until today to run their Groove stories, but Techweb
posted yesterday noon. Consequently their story was filled out with quotes
from patent filings and the comments of anonymous sources, one of whom spoke
"before he realized his nondisclosure agreement had not expired." Reporter
Barbara Darrow got on-the-record comments from analyst Judith Hurwitz and
from Dan Bricklin, one of the fathers of the spreadsheet (and Ozzie's former
boss).
Groove's software will be available for free download starting today, and
most of the coverage centered on the give-it-away business model. The Wall
Street Journal's William M. Bulkeley alone detailed the version Groove plans
to sell to businesses. The Globe's Hiawatha Bray quoted an Aberdeen Group
analyst thus: "It's a successful technology in my estimation, but the
business model is a little less secure."
* Keith Dawson
The King of Groove
http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,19601,00.html?nl=mg
Groove Gets It On
http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20001023S0006
Lotus Notes Developer to Introduce a New Internet Tool
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/24/technology/24GROO.html (Registration
required.)
Groups in Groove
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/298/business/Groups_in_Groove+.shtml
Lotus Notes Creator Will Unveil Long-Awaited Network Software
http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB972337082458627346.htm (Paid
subscription required.)
Groove Should Do Wonders for Peer-to-Peer Computing
http://www0.mercurycenter.com/svtech/columns/front/docs/dg102400.htm
=====================================
|
3,607 |
Subject: RE: myths vs facts
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/6052.
=====================================
Here's my cut at it. 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: Julee Malinowski-Ball [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 11:18 AM
To: Tom Ross; Sue Mara; Stephanie Newell; Robert Weisenmiller; Rob
Lamkin; Richard Hyde; Ray McNally; Paula Hall-Collins; kent Palmerton;
Kelli Norton; Kassandra Gough; John Stout; Joe Ronan; Jeff Dasovich;
Jean Munoz; Jack Pigott; Greg Blue; Doug Kerner; Curtis Kebler; Carolyn
Baker; Andy Brown; Lynn Lednicky
Cc: Jan Smutny Jones; Steven Kelley; Katie Kaplan
Subject: myths vs facts
Date: 12/20/00
To: IEP PR Group
From: Julee Malinowski-Ball, Edson + Modisette
RE: MYTHS VS FACTS
In response to Andy Brown's suggestion for additional fact sheets, I am
working on a "Myths vs Facts" paper and would like your recommendations (I'm
going to leave the gas issues fact sheet to someone else). Because we
already have a general restructuring and IEP solutions Frequently Asked
Questions being finalized, this fact sheet should focus on those persistent
myths that don't help us or the restructuring cause generally.
Attached is my top "myths" list. Please take some time to give me what your
top 10 "myths" are, and if you have time, include what points we need to hit
on in the "Facts."
THANKS.
Julee Malinowski-Ball
Senior Associate
Edson + Modsette
916-552-7070
FAX-552-7075
[email protected]
Myths and Facts
of Electric Restructuring
-- AB 1890 deregulated California' electricity industry. [FACT: is was
restructured and exlain how]
-- Utilities were forced to sell their power plants. [FACT:
-- Electricity rates have increased since electric restructuring passed in
1996. [FACT: Rates are capped]
-- Long-term deals will lock in overly high rates.
-- Power generating companies are refusing to sell power into California.
-- Power generating companies are out-of-state price gougers. [FACT: There
are many in-state generators which also include the utilities, their
affliates and the munis. Out-of-state generators include Arizona Public
Service, the federal government, BC hydro, etc]
- Myths vs Facts_abbrev1.doc
=====================================
|
3,608 |
Subject: Re: FW: Conversation with Edison re: Getting Negative CTC Paid
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/737.
=====================================
yes please...
Thank you Jeff
Dan
From: Jeff Dasovich/ENRON@enronXgate on 10/23/2001 05:04 PM
To: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: FW: Conversation with Edison re: Getting Negative CTC Paid
Dan:
Is this also information that you'd like to be kept apprised of. Just let me know.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:02 PM
To: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Mellencamp, Lisa; Tribolet, Michael; Sanders, Richard B.; Kean, Steven J.; Sharp, Vicki; Smith, Mike; Williams, Robert C.; Curry, Wanda; Swain, Steve; Huddleson, Diann; Calger, Christopher F.; Belden, Tim; Dietrich, Janet
Subject: Conversation with Edison re: Getting Negative CTC Paid
I talked to John Fielder (SVP Edison) about setting up a meeting for Barry Tycholiz with Edison's CFO about hedging Edison's QF price risk. Fielder wanted to talk about the negative CTC issue. Here's what he said:
? They plan to "settle" with the ESPs and pay them when they pay everyone else, which he re-iterated would be sometime in Q1'02.
? Edison is holding firm to the notion that the negative CTC contributed to the utility's undercollection and that the ESP's share of the undercollection has to be netted against the payables attributable to the negative CTC and owed the ESP.
? He said that they will propose to net it out in one of two ways: 1) lump sum netting (i.e., if they owe $50MM and the share of the undercollection is $30 MM, then they pay the ESP $20 MM; or 2) future reductions in PX Credit (i.e., they pay the ESP $50 MM, and then reduce the PX going forward until the $30 MM is paid down). The numbers are illustrative only.
? In addition, he said that they have the view that a decision is going to have to be made about 1) whether DA customers pay for stranded costs tied to the DWR L-T contracts, and 2) whether DA customers pay going forward for stranded costs tied to the QF contracts. (Edison is clearly lobbying the PUC to get DA customers to pay for these costs.)
? I recommended strongly that he de-link issues 1 and 2 above from the issue of paying us ASAP what they owe us for negative CTC. He agreed.
? He said that the PUC judge's recently issued pre-hearing conference order requires that Edison "meet and confer" with ESPs prior to the Nov. 7th hearing, and that Edison intends to set something up with ESPs prior to that hearing.
? Fielder is also the point person on "getting ESPs paid" and intends to initiate settlement discussions with ESPs week after next.
? It was very clear from the conversation that Edison is going to do everything possible (at the expense of creditors) to maximize headroom under the settlement it struck with the PUC a few weeks ago. Edison's stalemate with the QFs is evidence of it. We shouldn't assume anything different with the Negative CTC issue.
If you have any questions, let us know.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,609 |
Subject: Re: trying to locate PX Credit information
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28876.
=====================================
I owe ya.
James D Steffes
07/18/2001 07:47 AM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: trying to locate PX Credit information
Told Tamara the same. She is contacting PG&E.
Jim
From: Jeff Dasovich on 07/17/2001 11:36 AM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: trying to locate PX Credit information
Jim, I think that the point of the "flurry" is that we in California ain't
received anything from PG&E. Seemed that Wanda, from her note, said that she
is on top of it. Can you check in with Tamara and find out what her issues
are? Greatly appreciated.
(From what I heard on the phone last night, sounds like that little girl of
yours is going to be an opera singer.)
Best,
Jeff
Tamara Johnson@EES
07/17/2001 09:20 AM
To: JMB <[email protected]>, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/Enron@EnronXGate, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Lynne
Ruffer/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Re: trying to locate PX Credit information
There's been a flurry of e-mail on this.
My original question remains -- can whomever (in Govt Affairs) received the
PX Credit calculation info from PG&E please let me know?
(I am working on this on several fronts, i.e. with Wanda, Diann and Mary
Lynne. But I do need to see the PG&E info.)
Thanks.
Tamara
---------------------- Forwarded by Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES on 07/17/2001
09:18 AM ---------------------------
James D Steffes@ENRON
07/17/2001 07:47 AM
To: Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Re: trying to locate PX Credit information
Did Jeff get this info?
Jim
Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
From: Tamara Johnson @ EES 07/16/2001 04:19 PM
To: JMB <[email protected]>, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/Enron@EnronXGate, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Lynne
Ruffer/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: trying to locate PX Credit information
PG&E has changed the method of calculating the PX Credit recently. Prior to
June they appeared to be using a market based price for power, but in June
the credit dropped to about $40/MWh which looks like utility-owned gen.
We want to make sure we are not missing a utility-levied charge in our
forward curves ( e.g. CTC charge that will be applied to DA) so we're trying
to verify the utilities' method of calculating PX credits.
I talked to the PG&E accounting person who said that their Regulatory group
has sent Enron's regulatory group information on the way the PX Credit is
calculated. Can someone locate this information and forward it to me as soon
as possible? Given that our customers are all switching to DA we don't want
to discover there's a charge we don't know about.
Thanks,
Tamara.
=====================================
|
3,610 |
Subject: RE: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Jeff', 'Dasovich', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/1894.
=====================================
Let's look some more. I don't think there's anything that would disqualify any plants.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bolton, Stacey
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:57 PM
To: Bryson, Jesse
Cc: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
I should have copied you on my original email. My apologies. I'm copying in Jeff Dasovich to get his read on potentially changing this requirement. Jeff, what are your thoughts for affecting this language?
Stacey Bolton
Environmental Strategies
Enron Corp
713-853-9916 direct
713-303-2632 cell
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryson, Jesse
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:48 PM
To: Bolton, Stacey
Subject: FW: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
Stacey,
It occurred to me that I should have copied you in on this email to Elliot. We may want to see if we can change the language on this point. Let me know what you think.
Jesse
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryson, Jesse
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 3:42 PM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: FW: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
Elliot-
Take a close look at the language in this bill regarding the RPS. On page 7, lines 29-33, the bill states that all power must be under a direct contract to a retail seller. While this does provide us potential opportunities for scheduling and commodity management as Stacey pointed out, it also prevents merchant plants from qualifying as renewable. This would eliminate our service customers such as Delano, Wheelabrator, and Shasta. The link to the bill itself is:
<http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sbx2_78&sess=CUR&house=S&site=sen>
What do you think? Do you read it the same way?
-----Original Message-----
From: Mainzer, Elliot
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:35 PM
To: Bryson, Jesse
Subject: FW: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
-----Original Message-----
From: Bolton, Stacey
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:21 PM
To: Belden, Tim; Richter, Jeff; Mainzer, Elliot; Ring, Richard; Hammond, Pearce; Steffes, James D.; Dasovich, Jeff; Mara, Susan; Keene, Patrick
Cc: Terraso, Michael; Keeler, Jeff; Schoen, Mary
Subject: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
All -
Wanted to make you aware of a couple of bills before the CA legislature that would place a renewable purchase obligation on all retail sellers in California if enacted. The attached document provides a comparative analysis of both bills (which are quite similar in language) and the resulting commercial implications. One bill in particular has momentum in that is it attached to the SCE bailout. Jeff Dasovich and Sue Mara have their finger on the "pulse" on the movement of these bills, so as far as status please contact them.
Regards,
Stacey Bolton
Environmental Strategies
Enron Corp
713-853-9916 direct
713-303-2632 cell
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
=====================================
|
3,611 |
Subject: Re: California Update 7/23/01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/29011.
=====================================
Greetings:
Looks like our respective sources are tracking pretty well.
Best,
Jeff
Kristin Walsh/ENRON@enronXgate
07/23/2001 01:51 PM
To: John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Louise Kitchen/ENRON@enronXgate, David
W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Christopher F Calger/ENRON@enronXgate, Christian Yoder/ENRON@enronXgate,
Steve C Hall/ENRON@enronXgate, Mike Swerzbin/ENRON@enronXgate, Phillip K
Allen/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Chris
Gaskill/ENRON@enronXgate, Mike Grigsby/ENRON@enronXgate, Tim
Heizenrader/ENRON@enronXgate, Vince J Kaminski/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J
Kean/ENRON@enronXgate, Rob Milnthorp/ENRON@enronXgate, Kevin M
Presto/ENRON@enronXgate, Claudio Ribeiro/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard
Shapiro/ENRON@enronXgate, James D Steffes/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark
Tawney/ENRON@enronXgate, Scott Tholan/ENRON@enronXgate, Britt
Whitman/ENRON@enronXgate, Lloyd Will/ENRON@enronXgate, Alan
Comnes/ENRON@enronXgate, Rogers Herndon/ENRON@enronXgate, James W
Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Kelly
Holman/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Fletcher J
Sturm/ENRON@enronXgate, Doug Gilbert-Smith/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard B
Sanders/Enron@enronXgate, Andrew Edison/ENRON@enronXgate, Kelly
Holman/ENRON@enronXgate, Nancy Turner/ENRON@enronXgate, Tim
Belden/ENRON@enronXgate, John Brindle/ENRON@enronXgate, David
Cromley/ENRON@enronXgate
Subject: California Update 7/23/01
? When the Assembly reconvenes at 4:00 PDT it appears they will likely take
up the budget only; there is no word at this time that they will take up AB
82XX, and they do not appear to have the votes needed to pass it even if they
did take it up. The fact that Burton has come out against a conference
committee is an additional disincentive to work on 82XX. Therefore, at this
time it appears unlikely that 82XX will be passed before the recess.
? Instead, it appears likely that a working group will be established to work
on SB 78XX during the recess. This group will likely include members of
Keeley's, Hertzberg's and Burton's staffs. These staff members may be
allowed to go on vacation for a few weeks before returning to work on the MOU.
? The Assembly must pass the budget before they can recess. It is unclear at
this time if it will be possible to do so tonight or if it will take a few
days; the Senate, by leaving, has put the Assembly in a difficult position in
that they cannot amend anything. Also, the four Republicans who voted for
the budget last week are under significant pressure not to vote for the
trailer bills, meaning that Speaker Hertzberg has to find other Republicans
willing to cross party lines -- a difficult and very unpopular thing to do at
this point. This is likely why the Assembly is meeting so late in the day --
to allow Hertzberg time to work on the 8 or 9 Republicans on his list.
=====================================
|
3,612 |
Subject: RE: Reservation Confirmation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/7944.
=====================================
Do you have a place to stay on the 1st? And how do the rest of us get back
to the airport if you're not coming back until a day later? Maybe there's a
limo or bus that goes from Beverly Hills to Burbank. Also, how and when are
you arriving on the 24th? I remember that it's just a few minutes from the
time we arrive. Scott told me some time ago, but I can't find any notes on
that that I wrote down at the time.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cameron Sellers [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2000 12:22 PM
To: '[email protected]'
Cc: 'Mom'; 'Prentice (Berkeley)'; '[email protected]'
Subject: RE: Reservation Confirmation
I want the hotel for the night of the 31st. Thank you. Scott and I have
flights leaving on the 30th and returning on the 2nd. Yipeeee!!!
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: Eldon Sellers [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 3:10 PM
To: Cameron Sellers (E-mail); Cameron Sellers; Eldon (E-mail); Eldon
Sellers (E-mail); Nancy Sellers (E-mail); Jeffrey Dasovich (E-mail);
Prentice Sellers (E-mail); Prentice Sellers (E-mail 2); Scott Laughlin
(E-mail)
Subject: FW: Reservation Confirmation
<< File: Reservation Confirmation.txt >> This is what I received from the
Westwood Marquis which has undergone a
renovation. (I replied and told them to correct the address.) Let me know
if this is OK. I don't know if we can find a cheaper place, but if you
think this rate is too high I can try. Also, I made reservations to go to
Burbank on Dec. 31 using Southwest Airlines and leaving from Oakland at
10:40 am, arriving at 11:40. Returning on Jan. 1 at 8:15 pm and arriving at
9:20. However, I learned from Cameron that all but your mother and I will
be going on Dec. 30 so I will cancel that part of the reservation. I don't
know what your plans are for returning so I will not be making any other
reservations unless I hear from you. I originally made the returning
reservation at the time I did so that if we came back to the house on Monday
to watch football games and play games we would have some time to do that.
If we don't do that we could possibly get an earlier flight back. Your
mother doesn't want to come back too late, so your mother and I couldn't
possibly watch a movie if Hef has one planned for later, but you might
consider that possibility. Our check-in time at the W is 3:00 pm, possibly
earlier. I assume you got my message left on the answering machine that
everyone has been invited to the party.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 6:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Reservation Confirmation
=====================================
|
3,613 |
Subject: EA - Entrepreneurs Week is HERE!!!
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9871.
=====================================
EA Logo.bmp
Announcement:
?Entrepreneurs Week is HERE!!!
Sponsored by:
ITU logo.jpg
Tuesday (March 13):
12:30-2:00: Job Fair (hosted by Career Center) - B of A Forum
- come learn about PEL (Partners for Entrepreneurial Leadership) and BSG=20
(Berkeley Solutions Group)
6:30-9:00:? UCB Graduate Collaborate Roundtable Dinner - FULL
- for Berkeley grad students in business, engineering, law, and information=
=20
systems. Organized by the Graduate Collaborate, a multi-school team devoted=
=20
to improving the interactions between Berkeley's Graduate Schools.? What is=
=20
the Entrepreneurship Roundtable Dinner? At the event, you'll be matched to =
a=20
table with a balanced group of other fellow Cal graduate students from the=
=20
schools listed above to talk about business, technology, entrepreneurship a=
nd=20
to make contacts and new friends.
Potential Table Topics:
Next Generation Internet
Voice portals
3G
Digital Intellectual Property (The Napster Issue)
Optical Networking
Peer-to-Peer/Distributed Computing
B2B - when will it come back in vogue?
B2C - is it dead?
Wearable computing=20
Or whatever else you would like to suggest!
- for further information, including RSVP details: see e-mail from Steven=
=20
Schuman ([email protected])
Wednesday (March 14):
? 5:00-6:00:? Cyrus Harmon, Founder, President, CEO, Neomorphic, Inc. - Wel=
ls=20
Fargo Room - JUST ADDED !!!
? - Hear the story of the UC Berkeley entrepreneur who led Neomorphic, a=20
bioinformatics software company, from the back of an=20
??? envelope through its sale to Affymetrix for $70M!!
5:30-7:00:? Tour of Berkeley Incubator - Bancroft Hotel - Still Accepting=
=20
RSVP !!!
- Berkeley Incubator, founded in 1997 for start-ups created by current Haas=
=20
students and recent graduates.? Designed to provide office space, advanced=
=20
telecommunications capabilities and access to the Lester Center=01,s networ=
ks of=20
venture capitalists, attorneys, accountants, and consultants.
- if interested, please email Shing Wong ([email protected])
Friday (March 16):
3:30-4:45:? John Williams, SVP for Marketing Intelligence and Alliances, VI=
SA=20
International - Wells Fargo Room
- John Williams, Senior Vice President for Market Intelligence and Alliance=
s=20
at VISA International, will speak on his experiences as an original member =
of=20
the Palm team, a co-founder of Razorfish and a graduate of both the Haas an=
d=20
Boalt schools.
5:00-??:? EA/BBSA (Entrepreneurs Association / Black Business Students=20
Association) Consumption Function
- come enjoy great food, music, and beer
- entertainment:? Tony Rovello and the Highwater Blues Band... LIVE in the=
=20
courtyard!!!
- EA Logo.bmp
____________________________________
Shing Wong
President, Haas Entrepreneurs Association
MBA Candidate, May 2002
Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley
(510) 823 - 5437
[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,614 |
Subject: Important Project Announcements from the Center for the Advancement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13303.
=====================================
[IMAGE]
The California Electricity Crisis has resulted in an avalanche of=20
opportunity for the Center for the Advancement of Energy Markets (CAEM) to=
=20
provide its views on energy restructuring. Below you will find links to so=
me=20
of our recent documents.
In May, CAEM issued an update to the RED Index 2001 that?now includes the 1=
3=20
provinces and territories of Canada. The RED Index is a scorecard on the=
=20
progress states are making in electricity restructuring. RED Index Update=
=20
for Canada.?USA Today did a full page spread using CAEM=01,s RED Index to =
give=20
a summary of activity in the top 25 states. USA Today Article. The Governo=
r=20
of Pennsylvania included the RED Index Rank of Pennsylvania in his=20
State-of-the-State Address. Pennsylvania GovernorThe NY PSC issued a Press=
=20
Release on the RED Index. NY Commission
CAEM is pleased to announce the formation of a public-private sector projec=
t =20
called the Distributed Energy Task Force. At the request of important membe=
rs=20
of Congress, CAEM will be assessing opportunities for promotion of=20
distributed energy technologies and matching those opportunities with poli=
cy=20
instruments, i.e., tax incentives, funds for R&D etc. For a copy of the=20
project description and participation information, email a request to=20
[email protected].
In February, CAEM sponsored a meeting of the newly formed Leadership Counci=
l =20
on Energy Restructuring, an umbrella group of industry executives and publi=
c =20
sector officials who support the development of a coherent strategy on=20
energy restructuring. Leadership Council Document
In April, CAEM filed comments with the FTC on the proceeding that =20
was?initiatedat the request of House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairma=
n=20
Billy Tauzin on the impact of?States restructuring. CAEM FTC Comments
=20
In March, CAEM held its first meeting of the DISCO of the Future Forum. We =
=20
have posted several documents from that Forum. DISCO Forum Documents
Last Sunday, the Philadelphia Inquirer published the views of CAEM on =20
President Bush=01,s Energy Plan. Philadelphia Inquirer Article
In January, CAEM appeared on CNN to discuss the California Crisis. CNN Li=
nk
Feel free to forward this email to colleagues who may be interested in the=
=20
Center's activities.? For other information and documents, please visit o=
ur=20
website at http://www.caem.org
Please let us know if we can be of assistance to you in your efforts on =20
energy restructuring.
If you do not wish to receive updates on CAEM=01,s Activity, please reply w=
ith =20
the word "remove" in the subject line. Thank you.
?
Ken Malloy
President
Center for the Advancement of Energy Markets
5765-F Burke Center Parkway (PMB333)
Burke, VA 22015-2233
o 703-250-1580
f? 248-928-5040
e [email protected]
w http://www.caem.org
?
- new logo16.bmp
=====================================
|
3,615 |
Subject: What we discussed at Yesterday's Meeting at the ISO
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/29.
=====================================
FYI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 08/29/2000 10:24
AM ---------------------------
Gary Ackerman <[email protected]> on 08/24/2000 12:39:56 PM
Please respond to [email protected]
To: Bill Ross <[email protected]>, Bob Anderson <[email protected]>,
Carolyn Baker <[email protected]>, Corby Gardin
<[email protected]>, Curtis Kebler
<[email protected]>, Denice Cazalet <[email protected]>, Gene
Waas <[email protected]>, Greg Blue <[email protected]>, Jack Pigott
<[email protected]>, Ken Czarnecki <[email protected]>, Kent
Wheatland <[email protected]>, "Klemstine, Barbara A(F56661)"
<[email protected]>, Randy Hickok <[email protected]>, Rob
Lamkin <[email protected]>, Rob Nichol <[email protected]>,
robert berry <[email protected]>, Roger Pelote <[email protected]>, Sue Mara
<[email protected]>, curt hatton <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich
<[email protected]>, Reggie Howard <[email protected]>, Brian Jobson
<[email protected]>, Steve Fisher <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: What we discussed at Yesterday's Meeting at the ISO
Folks,
I thought it would be a good idea to review what we discussed
yesterday, on August 23 in Folsom at the ISO, so there is no public
misunderstanding about our discussion, or our intent.
Yesterday's meeting at the ISO, at which WPTF had many of its members
who either have generation in the State, or import power into
California, was for market participants and the ISO to discuss how to
bring more order and price transparency to the ISO's out of market
calls. WPTF had met on its own initiative several weeks before with
members from the California PX, and APX to identify a suitable product
that would satisfy the ISO's needs during or to avoid system
emergencies. Also, we sought a matching service of parties willing to
sell into a super-peak firm energy market with those who are willing to
purchase.
APX and CalPX responded to our earlier discussions with specific product
proposals, and presented their proposals to the group at yesterday's
meeting. The discussions which ensued during the course of that meeting
focused on how the ISO might utilize a product/service to reduce the
manpower requirements currently needed to satisfy its out of market
telephone calls, typically on short notice, and the interest on the part
of market participants to make bids into either the APX or CalPX's
proposed system for a super-peak firm-energy product.
There were no commitments made by any party, simply a willingness to
work together to alleviate the problems associated with finding
sufficient electric power during high demand periods with greater
transparency, more participants, and greater market efficiency.
There was no discussion of commodity prices, price fixing, or bid
strategies.
Gary B. Ackerman
=====================================
|
3,616 |
Subject: accusations get nasty
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12888.
=====================================
You will not beleive what was said in the artical below.
----- Forwarded by April Hrach/SF/ECT on 05/22/2001 11:04 AM -----
Catherine McKalip-Thompson@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
05/22/2001 10:54 AM
To: Scott Healy/SF/ECT@ECT, April Hrach/SF/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: accusations get nasty
see article below
----- Forwarded by Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications on
05/22/01 10:59 AM -----
excerpt from an article
Joe W. Kolb
Environmental Manager, Enron Corp
713/646-6180 713/345-6164 fax
3AC 1517
----- Forwarded by Joe Kolb/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 05/22/2001 08:00 AM -----
Bill
Osborne/ENRON@ To: John
Steenberg/ENRON@enronXgate, Ted Ryther/ENRON@enronXgate,
enronXgate William Kendrick/ENRON@enronXgate,
Joe
Kolb/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
05/22/2001
cc:
07:54 AM Subject: now that's not
nice!
from:
California Blame Game Yields No Score
---
Probes Reveal Little Evidence Suppliers Acted Illegally
By John R. Emshwiller
05/22/2001
The Wall Street Journal
While the energy suppliers are generating "unconscionable profits," the
question remains "whether they are illegal profits," says California
Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who has offered rewards of as much as
hundreds of millions of dollars for information about lawbreaking in the
energy business.
Mr. Lockyer says he believes his office will eventually file civil charges
against suppliers. He would very much like to add criminal counts. "I would
love to personally escort [Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth] Lay to an 8 x 10
cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says `Hi my name is
Spike, honey,'" adds Mr. Lockyer. Houston-based Enron is a major
energy-trading company. Like other such firms, Enron has denied wrongdoing
in the California market.
Mark Palmer, Enron's vice president for corporate communications, said Mr.
Lockyer's comment about Mr. Lay "is so counterproductive that it doesn't
merit a response."
[email protected]
Enron Transportation Services
713/646-7889 713/646-7867 fax
3AC 3141
=====================================
|
3,617 |
Subject: Register Jeffrey-Dasovich.com TODAY!
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12176.
=====================================
This advertisement has been sent to you by TheStreet.com because you are=20
currently or within the last year have been a subscriber (either free-trial=
=20
or paid) to one of our web sites, www.thestreet.com or www.realmoney.com. I=
f=20
you are not a current or former subscriber, and you believe you received th=
is=20
message in error, please forward this message to [email protected], or=
=20
call our customer service department at 1-800-562-9571. Please be assured=
=20
that we respect the privacy of you, our subscribers, and that we have not=
=20
disclosed your name or any other information about you to the advertiser or=
=20
any other third party.=20
Untitled
[IMAGE][IMAGE]???=20
?www.Jeffrey-Dasovich.com
Dear Jeffrey Dasovich:=20
SECURE YOUR PIECE OF THE WEB!=20
The Internet is quickly becoming the center of all communication, and we=20
invite you to register Jeffrey-Dasovich.com*, Dasovich.com*, or=20
Dasovichfamily.com* with register.com=0FT.??With the boom in personal domai=
n=20
name registrations, names are going fast so claim YOURS before it's too lat=
e!=20
[IMAGE]
A WHOLE PACKAGE, NOT JUST A NAME!=20
In addition to your personalized domain name, your package includes:=20
A personalized email box.??For example, [email protected]. You c=
an=20
choose between Web-based email, or just have your messages forwarded to an=
=20
existing account.=20
A 3 page personalized Web site!=20
24-7 toll free customer support AND real time Domain Manager application.
URL forwarding.
At other registrars, you'd pay a lot more for these great tools and=20
services.??To get a comparable package** at other registrars, you'd pay:
Network Solutions
$129
NameSecure
$64.95
Registrars.com
$49.95
REGISTER.COM
ONLY $19.99!
CLICK HERE TO SEE IF www.Jeffrey-Dasovich.com* IS STILL AVAILABLE!=20
CLICK HERE to check the availability of another domain name AND register=20
today!=20
Don't forget to enter invite code "epr88s845" where prompted at Step 6.??Wh=
at=20
are you waiting for?
This promotion expires on July 19, 2001, so act quickly!=20
*Register.com makes no representations as to whether or not these names=20
infringe or violate any trademark or intellectual property rights.??Domain=
=20
names listed in this offer are subject to availability.??Offer applies to=
=20
.com, .net and .org new registrations only, and for a limited time.=20
**Products and services within different registrars' packages may vary.=20
This offer is non-transferable and subject to the terms and conditions of o=
ur=20
Services Agreement, located at:=20
http://www.register.com/service-agreement.cgi?SRC=3Depr88s845 =20
To learn more about the disclosure and use of registration information in=
=20
register.com's published Privacy Notice, please visit: =20
http://www.register.com/faq/privacy-notice.cgi?SRC=3Depr88s845=20
, 2001 register.com, inc. All rights reserved.=20
=====================================
|
3,618 |
Subject: California Crisis Update (Daily Conf. Call has been changed to
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9211.
=====================================
The "California Crisis" daily conference call has been changed to a weekly
call beginning next week, February 19. The call will now take place every
Monday at 10:30am CST w/ an exception of this Monday, February 19. Since
this is a holiday, the call will take place on Tuesday, February 20 at
10:30am CST. The same dial in number will apply for the weekly call (please
see below for dial information).
Updated information on California will be sent via e:mail when available.
Also, if there is someone who needs to get this information that is not on
this address list, please make sure you forward this message to them.
If you have any questions please feel free to call.
Thanks
gngr
713-853-7751
Richard Shapiro
Sent by: Ginger Dernehl
01/11/2001 03:09 PM
To: Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, James
Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rick
Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron,
Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, David W
Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark S
Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES,
Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Mark E
Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael Moran/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, Mark
Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie
Harris/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharron
Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Dolores Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Beverly
Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Ruth Ann Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Ruth Mann/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kay
Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kimberly Hillis/HOU/ECT@ect, Cindy
Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Lysa
Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES,
Binky Davidson/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Hermann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: California Crisis Update (Daily Conf. Call)
A conference call, regarding the above subject, has been scheduled daily to
provide a single place and time to review what has occurred over the last 24
hours regarding the California crisis and what lies ahead. The conf. call
information will be as follows:
Date: Daily (beginning 1/12/01 - 1/26/01) there will not be a call on
Monday, January 15
Time: 10:30am (CST)
Number: 1-800-998-2462
passcode 4912753
Location: EB4701 (for those in Houston)
Please feel free to forward this information to others you feel should
participate.
=====================================
|
3,619 |
Subject: California Update 3/27/01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4689.
=====================================
Executive Summary:
? Undercollet Remains Sticking Point for Utility Creditors (especially QFs),
involuntary bankruptcy likely if issue is not addressed in today's CAPUC
hearings
? CAPUC Rate Increase Set at 40%, Pending DWR Power Purchase Details
? Davis Defends No Rate Increase Position, Distances Himself from CAPUC
QF/Generator undercollect may be an invitation to involuntary bankruptcy
As reported last week, QF has sitting and waiting to hear what the CAPUC has
to say, unfortunately it may not be what the QFs want to hear. The
utilities' undercollect, which will not be addressed in today's CAPUC
hearings, could very well provide an invitation for QFs and generators to
file involuntary bankruptcy against SoCal and PG&E. Recent rate hikes
proposed by the CAPUC specifically dictate that any revenue generated from
rate increases cannot be used to pay off utility past debt, leaving the QF
with little hope of recovery. QFs were obviously dismayed by the CAPUC's
draft order and if the decision is passed as it currently reads, an
involuntary bankruptcy filing is still likely.
CAPUC holds rate increase hearings today
As reported yesterday, Loretta Lynch released the details of the CAPUC's
draft rate increase order last night. There is expected to be a 3 cent/kwh
surcharge on power bills or roughly a 40% rate increase. A portion of this
"surcharge" will be given to the DWR to cover its costs and the order
concludes that utilities need revenues on a going-forward basis. Therefore,
utilities can only use the revenues for power purchases going forward and are
expressly forbidden from using this cash to pay down past debt (ex. QFs).
However, the utilities are ordered to resume payments to the QFs on a
going-forward basis. The net effect of the order is to allow the utilities
to operate in case of bankruptcy.
One interesting point in the draft is its decision which calls on the
utilities to join with the state in pursuing a refund on the amount
overcharged for power by the generators. The suggestion is that the
utilities take legal action against the generators to recoup funds. Only the
funds recovered from generators can be used to pay down the utilities' past
debt. If the utilities choose this course of action, it would be a very
lengthy process.
Davis contends with Lynch on CAPUC rate increases.
Davis has thus far refused to support CAPUC's proposed rate increase stating
the CAPUC decision making board is an independent body and that he continues
to believe that a resolution can be found within the current rate structure.
Sources indicate that he is likely to ask for Lynch's letter of resignation,
however, there is no indication she will comply. Senator Burton, who
supports the CAPUC's plan, reportedly will protect Lynch by not allowing her
to be impeached (which is the only other way she could be removed by the
governor).
=====================================
|
3,620 |
Subject: Increase to Industrials Only? [Re: MRW Consultant - Status]
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5073.
=====================================
[Sorry guys, I didn't click "reply all" on this reply to Jim.]
Given recent press releases, it seems as if the governor is suggesting that
the use of "real-time meters" be increased so as to give correct price
signals to customers.
Do you--or any sources in California--know if they foresee increasing the
on-peak charge? This would effectively result in only commercial and
industrial customers paying for the shortfall.
/Tamara.
---------------------- Forwarded by Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES on 03/06/2001
11:19 AM ---------------------------
Tamara Johnson
03/05/2001 09:16 AM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: MRW Consultant - Status
Regarding rate-specific forecasts:
I suggest using the current frozen tariffs as a starting point, with the
forecasted generation cost increases to be applied as a straight $/MWh
adder. This would allow MRW efforts to be concentrated on generation cost
forecasts -- which is obviously the biggest uncertainty.
As a side issue, I would ask that they provide their perspective on how
bundled generation might be priced on a go-forward basis. For example, if
they see the IOU's going back to old-school demand and energy charges. Or,
if they see that the on or off-peak percentages might change. Given their
knowledge of rate-making practices in California, this should take minimal
time and provide all that is needed. They would then be set up to do some
what-ifs on existing rate structures.
/Tamara.
From: James D Steffes@ENRON on 03/02/2001 06:50 PM
To: Robert Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Tamara
Johnson/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: MRW Consultant - Status
On your last point, I think that we need to as rate class specific as
possible without delaying their work. Disagreements?
Jim
Robert Neustaedter@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
03/01/2001 06:20 PM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: MRW Consultant - Status
Spoke with Bill Munson and Roger Yang of MRW
Scope of project would be rate forecast for PGE and SCE industrial/commercial
class customers for 24-36 month period providing alternate scenarios for
certain issues - MRW will provide assumptions Friday morning.
Cost - Close of Monday deliverable - $10k
- Thursday - $7k
FYI - Submitted RCR for $25K
With respect to determination of "Net Short" generation cost - MRW suggested
generation cost be allocated on a cost incurrence basis (no subsidies) and
that we agree as to mix of DRW portfolio and utilize Enron forward curves to
price out
Provided to MRW utility tariff schedules that majority of positions are
under. Need to determine if we want an individual rate projection, average
rate class projection or benchmark projection (%increase).
=====================================
|
3,621 |
Subject: RE: Well...
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', "Jeff Dasovich'; Prentice Sellers; Prentice @ Berkeley"]
File: dasovich-j/sent/4781.
=====================================
Well, get out there and weed, then. Can't take Annie (too short a trip).
I'm pretty sure that we'll be there. Make tee times for 9 am? You can wait
till we see you to pay. They did charge corkage---just a nice, not too
expensive place.
Nancy Sellers <[email protected]>
05/31/2001 12:49 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, "Prentice @
Berkeley" <[email protected]>, Prentice Sellers
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Well...
There are a few pesky little weeds around some - not all - the tomatoes.
Lots around the melons, some in the herbs and flowers. So you are not
taking Annie with you?? Please scout around for Liz Whiting's car keys.
They were in her purse and she can't find them now. Look under the beds
etc. upstairs if you would please.
It had to be more than $50 per person!!! Did they not charge the
corkage???????? Shall I mail you a check or wait till you are in Napa? We
would love to play golf Sunday - I will make a time if you are sure you will
be there - what time would you like??
That shirt????????? Puh-leez.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 10:34 AM
To: Nancy Sellers
Cc: 'Jeff Dasovich'; Prentice Sellers; Prentice @ Berkeley
Subject: Re: Well...
Puh-leez. We did the plastic and the rocks to avoid weeding. How can
there be any weeding? Unfortunately we can't stop by on the way up, but
likely on the way back, which may be Saturday night. If so, do you guys
wan't to play golf on Sunday morning? (Prentice is leaving with her pals
today, and I'm heading up sometime tomorrow.)
Dinner was exactly $50/person. Thanks for bringing the wine----my shirt
loved it.
Best,
Jeff
Nancy Sellers
<Nancy.Sellers@RobertMo To: "'Jeff Dasovich'"
ndavi.com>
<[email protected]>, "Prentice @ Berkeley"
<[email protected]>, Prentice Sellers
05/31/2001 09:20 AM <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Well...
Just in from watering the west 40. I think this is going to be our best
year ever - lookin' good, lookin' good. However, there is some serious
weeding that someone needs to do!!!
I am presuming you guys are stopping in Napa before your dome trek (which
is
why I thought I could give you a check immediately!). Is that the case?
If
so, I hope you can join us in a nummy little repast! If not, I will put a
check in the mail when you let me know the amount. Unlike some, I always
carry my checkbook with me!
Those were incredibly beautiful knives that you guys gave Cameron!
Nancy
(707) 251-4870 (phone)
(707) 265-5446 (fax)
"Plus je bois, mieux je chante"
=====================================
|
3,622 |
Subject: IMPORTANT! New Accounts Payable System
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12142.
=====================================
Hi All-
Enron has decided to outsource our accounts payable department and also
implement a whole new system for paying invoices.
What this means to all of us is you may receive email(s) from iBuyit
Payables. These are very important emails! These are invoices
that need to be paid. Any ENA people receiving invoices should automatically
assume they go to me. As for Sue's group I think
any invoices you receive will need to go to Joseph. If you are unsure please
let he or I know and we can figure out which one of us should
get the invoice.
Here is the irritating part: You can not just forward the iBuyit Payables
email to me/him. You must click onto the first link in the email (see
example below).
Then log on to the iBuyit Payables system using your P00# and log-on password
(these are the same P00# and password you use to access
eHRonline). At this point you will be at your iBuyit Payables in-box. I
pasted a copy of my in-box below as an example. There are boxes to check
if you want to forward the invoice. If you check them all then click on
'Quick Forward' a forward box will appear. Type in mine, or Joseph's (if
it's his
invoice) last name in the 'last name' box, then click search. From there you
can click 'Forward'. I will not only ensure the invoice is paid, but also
give the vendor the correct information for future invoices.
Please bare with me during this time. This whole process isn't going to be
very much fun for any of us. However, I have made it my priority to have
this new invoice situation organized as quickly as possible. If anyone has
any questions please let me know. On one last note: All paper invoices
should still be given directly to me then I can send them to A/P for scanning.
Thanks,
April Hrach
Administrative Coordinator
Phone: 415-782-7825
Fax: 415-782-7851
EXAMPLE EMAIL:
Please do not reply to this e-mail.
You are receiving this message because an invoice requiring coding, issue
resolution, or approval has been submitted to your iBuyit Payables in-box.
This requires your action through iBuyit Payables.
To launch iBuyit Payables, click on the link below:
http://iBuyitPayables.enron.com (This is the link you need to click on)
Note: Log into iBuyitPayables using the same Employee PID (P-Number) and
Password you use to enter the eHRonline system and/or SAP.
First time iBuyit Payables user? For training materials, click on the link
below:
http://sap.enron.com/sap_doclib/user/file_list.asp?cabinet_id=265
Need help?
Please contact the ISC Call Center at (713) 345-4727.
EXAMPLE iBuyit Payables in-box:
Records Returned: 2
Page 1 of 1: ???
Forward
Invoice Number
Company Number
Vendor
Invoice Due Date
Resolution Type
Invoice Amount
Invoice
Status
5-735-88723
0413
FEDERAL EXPRESS
03/16/2001
Miscellaneous
175.21
8717
0011
MERIDIAN CYBER SOLUTIONS
05/15/2001
Needs Coding/Approval
1034.97
=====================================
|
3,623 |
Subject: Revised Agenda for next TAR&L meeting
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/eci/2.
=====================================
1. Based on discussions from the 11/8 meeting, step through a specific
US/Japan trading example for bandwidth purchased and resold by the US trading
desk, specifically determining what the US trading desk can and cannot do
with respect to each piece of the international capacity segment (see
attached file).
2. Time permitting, step through a US/Japan trading example for bandwidth
purchased and resold by the Singapore trading desk, specifically determining
what a hypothetical Singapore trading desk could and could not do with
respect to each piece of the international capacity segment.
3. Develop a prioritized plan of action specifying steps, accountabilities,
format, and timeline for each area of responsibility to work together to
provide necessary input for traders for each of the following jurisdictions:
Europe
Japan
Hong Kong
Australia
Singapore
Taiwan
Korea
Brazil
Mexico
Argentina
Chile
Venezuela
Colombia
4. Review and discuss Dave Merrill's note on Korea.
5. Time permitting, step through a specific US/Korea trading example as in
point one above.
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 13/11/2000 19:52
-----
Wayne Gardner
10/11/2000 16:43
To: Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sue
Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Michelle Hicks/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Lara Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jan
Haizmann/LON/ECT@ECT, Rajen Shah/LON/ECT@ECT, James Ginty/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Derenda Plunkett/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Alisa Christensen/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, David
Merrill/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Robbi Rossi/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: Draft Agenda for next TAR&L meeting - Comments welcome
1. Based on discussions from the 11/8 meeting, step through a specific
US/Japan trading example, specifically determining what the US trading desk
can and cannot do with respect to each piece of the international capacity
segment (see attached file).
2. Review and discuss Dave Merril's note on Korea.
3. Step through a specific US/Korea trading example as in point one above.
4. Time permitting, step through a US/Japan trading example, specifically
determining what a hypothetical Singapore trading desk could and could not do
with respect to each piece of the international capacity segment.
5. Time permitting, determine the best general trading structure for Asia
and highlight specific problem areas that need to be identified with respect
to the structure.
W. Wayne Gardner
Enron Broadband Services
1400 Smith Street
Houston, TX 77002-7361
Phone: 713 853 3547
Fax: 713 646 2532
=====================================
|
3,624 |
Subject: Re: REVISED Merged Leg Document
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/905.
=====================================
No intent to make people pay twice. Anticipated that Edison might not want to be at risk for costs associated with retail gen service (e.g., AS, GMC, shaping) while only allowed to charge the wholesale price. Any changes necessary to ensure no double counting are welcome.
Also, if 30 days seems to short to for some customers do strike a deal with either the utility or an ESP, then it might be appropriate, and I wouldn't object, to extending it to 90 days. In my conversation with Dorothy, both 30 and 90 came up. 90 is reasonable, but it would seem to be the uppermost limit.
Thanks very much for the comments.
Best,
Jeff
BRBarkovich <[email protected]> 07/09/2001 06:12 PM To: [email protected] cc: [email protected], "'Dorothy Rothrock (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'John Fielder (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Phil Isenberg (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Keith McCrea (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Linda Sherif (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Linda Sherif (E-mail 2)'" <[email protected]>, "'Gary Schoonyan (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'John White (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "Dominic DiMare (E-mail)" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: REVISED Merged Leg Document
I do not agree with Jeff's changes to Dorothy's language and I am not sure if Dorothy does.
In particular, I don't know what is meant by the language in the definition of Spot Market
Service which says "and shall include all costs incurred by the electrical corporation to
provide retail electric service" which seems to me to go way beyond even energy service. I
am also concerned that there be no way that customers have to pay for A/S twice.
Second, I think 30 days is too short a time for a customer on Spot Market service to elect
DA or Term Service, since if the UDC is providing Term Service on a best efforts basis, that
option might not even be available within 30 days. Barbara
Delaney Hunter wrote:
> Folks-
> Sorry for the delay --- major computer problems over here. I have used Ann's
> document and added the changes I made as a template. It is in redline and
> the questions are highlighted as well. Please look over it carefully and if
> there is language you are going to provide please do it post haste.
>
> WE WILL NOT HAVE A 2:00 CALL --- I think most folks are just too damn busy.
> So, if there is a question, problem, disagreement, etc on language please
> work it out amongst yourselves and send me new language if applicable.
> Remember this is due to Rick BY 5:00 PM TODAY!!!!!
>
> Call me with questions,
> Delaney
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: REVISED Merged Leg Language.doc
> REVISED Merged Leg Language.doc Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
> Encoding: base64
=====================================
|
3,625 |
Subject: Rumor That The Legislature May Reconvene
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/29093.
=====================================
Bizarre as it sounds, we've now heard that they are calling the Assembly
members back. So it appears that the Assembly leadership will at least make
a run at this. We are getting more information and mobilizing industry.
Some key considerations:
The Governor is putting immense pressure on the Legislature to get something
done.
The Legislature is fearful of getting blamed by the Governor for having "done
nothing."
Becauase the Assembly has thus far "done nothing," the only thing it has in
front of it is 78.
The Assembly could not agree to the Speaker's bill because it felt the bill
was too far to the left; but 78 is even more one-sided. So there's a
reasonable likelihood that 78 would have to be amended considerably in order
to get the support necessary to get voted out.
Once voted out of the Assembly, it would have to go back to the Senate, where
the Senate would have to approve it.
Again, the Senate has adjourned, so Burton would have to round them up and
call them back for a vote, and there's no indication at this time that
Burton's inclined to come back.
In addition, Burton has said that he's not interested in making any changes
to 78, that "it's 78 or nothing." Consequently, for the Sentate (i.e.,
Burton) to vote it out, it would first have to agree to the Assembly's
amendments. Thus far, the Assembly and the Senate have not seen eye to eye
on the issues.
All that said, this Legislature is far from rational, and nothing can be
counted out. We're therefore operating under the assumption that 78 could
move.
Will report back as information becomes available.
Best,
Jeff
"Scott Govenar" <[email protected]>
07/24/2001 05:15 PM
Please respond to sgovenar
To: "Ban Sharma" <[email protected]>, "David Leboe"
<[email protected]>, "Eric Letke" <[email protected]>, "Jennifer Thome"
<[email protected]>, "Ken Smith" <[email protected]>, "Bev
Hansen" <[email protected]>, "Hedy Govenar" <[email protected]>, "Miyung
Buster" <[email protected]>, "Janel Guerrero"
<[email protected]>, "Robert Frank" <[email protected]>, "Mike Day"
<[email protected]>, "Leslie Lawner" <[email protected]>, "Harry.
Kingerski@enron. com" <[email protected]>, "Karen Denne"
<[email protected]>, "Steven Kean" <[email protected]>, "Alan Comnes"
<[email protected]>, "Susan J Mara" <[email protected]>, "Paul Kaufman"
<[email protected]>, "Jeff Dasovich" <[email protected]>, "Jim Steffes"
<[email protected]>, "Rick Shapiro" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: ASSEMBLY SESSION - URGENT
The Assembly is tentatively scheduled to take up SBX2 78 in committee on
Friday. If the bill passes, it may go straight to the Assembly floor that
night. The Senate may go in either late Friday or early Monday to take up
the bill as amended although this has not been confirmed.
Amendments to SBX 78 may be available tomorrow.
=====================================
|
3,626 |
Subject: THE WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE BRINGS HEAVY HITTERS TO HAAS
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/411.
=====================================
THE WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE BRINGS HEAVY HITTERS TO HAAS
All faculty, students, staff, and alumni are invited to the 6th annual Women in Leadership Conference, which takes place on Saturday, October 20. This year's theme, "Explore, Inspire, Excel," is embodied by two exceptional keynote speakers: Donna Dubinsky, founder, president, and CEO of Handspring, and Beth Sawi, chief administrative officer and executive vice president of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.
The annual WIL conference is the longest-running student-run conference at Haas. Last year it attracted more than 400 participants including current MBA and undergraduate students, alumni, and career women from the greater Bay Area.
Dubinsky gives the first keynote address of the day. She co-founded Handspring with Jeff Hawkins in July 1998 to create a new breed of hand-held computers for consumers. Before joining Handspring Dubinsky served as president and CEO of Palm Computing, where she helped make the Palm Pilot the best-selling hand-held computer and the most rapidly adopted new computing product ever produced. When Dubinsky first joined Hawkins at Palm Computing in 1992, shortly after the company was founded, she brought with her more than ten years of marketing and logistics experience from Apple and Claris. Dubinsky and Hawkins introduced the original Palm Pilot in February 1996, a move that revitalized the hand-held computing industry. She earned her BA from Yale University and her MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration.
Beth Sawi oversees Human Resources, Corporate Communications, Community Affairs, Legal, Compliance, Internal Audit, and Corporate Services. She is also a member of the executive committee for The Charles Schwab Corporation. She will give the afternoon keynote address.
Sawi is a long-time veteran of Schwab; she started her career at Schwab in 1982. From 1995 to 1997 she was executive vice president of Electronic Brokerage, during which time she headed Schwab's Internet launch. Sawi took a sabbatical in Italy in 1998-99 during which she wrote her book "Coming Up for Air: How to Build a Balanced Life in a Workaholic World," published by Hyperion in February 2000. She received a BA from Tufts University and an MBA from the Stanford University Graduate School of Business.
Throughout the day, conference attendees will interact with leaders from a variety of professional backgrounds through the conference's panel sessions and workshops. Panels planned for this year's conference include:
+ Management Techniques to Inspire and Motivate
+ Women and the New Economy - Women in the Tech World
+ International Business
+ Wild Women
This year's conference is sponsored by Fortune, Ford, Chevron, Genentech, J.P. Morgan, Johnson & Johnson, Accenture, Goldman Sachs, and Adobe.
For more information on the WIL conference, please visit <http://www.wilconference.org/2001/index.html>.
=====================================
|
3,627 |
Subject: Re: Ken Lay Meetings in CA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11603.
=====================================
Rosalee,
per Jeff Dasovich, please find following the contact information for those
referenced:
Governor Davis
(916) 445-4633
House Speaker Robert Hertzberg
(916) 319-2040; District office (Van Nuys [Southern CA]): (818) 904-3840
House Republican member John Campbell
(916) 319-2070; District office (Irvine [Southern CA]): (949) 863-7070
House Minority Leader David Cox
(916) 319-2005; District office (also Sacramento): (916) 349-1995
Senate Majority Leader John Burton
(916) 445-1412; District office (San Francisco): (415) 557-1300
Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte
(916) 445-3688; District office (Rancho Cucamonga): (909) 466-9096
Hope this helps! If you need any clarification, please do not hesitate to
contact me at
(415) 782-7841.
Thanks,
Joseph Alamo
Sr. Admin. Assistant
Government Affairs - The Americas
San Francisco CA
---------------------- Forwarded by Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron on 04/25/2001 03:14
PM ---------------------------
From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/25/2001 04:48 PM CDT
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: [email protected], Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel
Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Ken Lay Meetings in CA
Rosalee:
Thanks very much for helping arrange the meetings. Here is the list thus
far. There may be additions. I've also suggested dates for the meetings.
May 3rd in Sacramento (after the meeting with David Freeman):
Governor Davis (he spends a lot of time in Los Angeles and you may find that
he prefers to meet there).
House Speaker Robert Hertzberg
House Republican member John Campbell (Republican's point person on energy
issues)
House Minority Leader David Cox
Senate Majority Leader John Burton
Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte
May 4th--Morning, in Los Angeles
John Bryson, CEO Edison International
Governor Davis (unless the meeting occurs on the 3rd in Sacramento)
May 4th--Afternoon, in San Francisco
Bob Glynn, CEO PG&E
Joseph Alamo from our office will provide you with the phone numbers for John
Campbell, David Cox, John Burton, and Jim Brulte. I assume that your office
has the numbers for John Bryson and Bob Glynn. If you do not have the
numbers, let me know and I will get them for you. Thanks again for your help.
Best,
Jeff
Rosalee Fleming
04/25/2001 03:09 PM
To: Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Ken Lay Meetings in CA
We will do it. Maureen and I have already talked about the Freeman meeting
and we are making Steve hotel reservations, wherever we put Ken.
Rosie
Janel Guerrero
04/25/2001 02:19 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Ken Lay Meetings in CA
Since Steve Kean is planning to accompany Ken on his meetings next week in
CA, please be sure to cc Maureen McVicker on all meetings that are scheduled
so she can manage Steve's calendar.
Thanks.
=====================================
|
3,628 |
Subject: PG&E Gas OII Settlement Tariffs
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/ofos/1.
=====================================
Gas OII Parties
Per our discussion at the April 10 meeting to discuss draft tariffs to
implement the PG&E Gas OII settlement, PG&E is providing the following
materials:
* Revised Gas OII and PG&E Tariff Preparation Schedule. The testimony
and hearing schedule adopted at the April 11 prehearing conference is now
included, along with revised dates for the tariff approval process for
PG&E's settlement. Please remember that much of this schedule is
speculative - and highly dependent on the actual timing of Commission
actions and presumes we can achieve broad consensus on tariff language. For
PG&E's settlement tariffs, we have delayed our providing a next draft until
May 25. We need the extra time to address the issues raised at the April 10
meeting, and to further explore our internal process requirements. We
therefore delayed our next tariff meeting until June 27, which should be
after hearings and opening briefs on SoCal matters. If the litigation
schedule changes, we may need to revisit our tariff preparation schedule.
* List of Issues. This list is compiled from the April 10 meeting,
plus the April 6 CPAG meeting. As we work through these issues, we may be
contacting individual parties to further discuss the issue before we send
out our next tariff draft. Please let us know if you have comments or
additions to this list.
* Exhibit A to Attachment K to the CTA Request Form, proposed CTA bill
format. A draft of this proposed bill format Exhibit has been completed
since we sent out the last package. The attached table is for your
information on the source of various elements to be included in the bill
format, and would not be part of the final Exhibit. If you have questions
or comments on this Exhibit, please include Cathy Bretz on your E-mail
([email protected]) or call her at 415-973-3140.
* Core Rate Impacts of CTA Storage Unbundling. An illustration of the
expected rate impacts of this program was completed since we sent out the
last package. This illustration was presented at the CPAG and Tariff Review
meetings. If you have questions or comments on this attachment, please
include Jerry Miller on your E-mail ([email protected]) or call him at
415-973-4104.
We also continue to welcome comments or concerns you may have on the draft
tariffs for our Comprehensive Gas OII Settlement. We will try to respond to
them in our next draft tariff package, to be sent May 25.
Thanks to those parties who attended the April 10 meeting and provided
excellent comments and suggestions.
Sincerely,
Randy Litteneker
Attachments
<<OII + Tariff Schedule w6.doc>> <<April 10 GasOII Wrkshp Issues_.doc>>
<<EXHIBIT A of ATTACHMENT K Sample Consolidated Bill Items cb2.doc>>
<<Illustrative Rates_CTA unbundling.doc>>
- OII + Tariff Schedule w6.doc
- April 10 GasOII Wrkshp Issues_.doc
- EXHIBIT A of ATTACHMENT K Sample Consolidated Bill Items cb2.doc
- Illustrative Rates_CTA unbundling.doc
=====================================
|
3,629 |
Subject: Fw: Fessler Fesses Up to What Went Wrong in California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9669.
=====================================
This was too choice not to pass on. Whadda guy. Happy birthday, by the
way. You ageing beauty, you. I do want to catch up on lots of stuff but my
current schedule is extremely hectic. Do you have schedule constraints?
Coffee some morning good for you? G.
-----Original Message-----
From: Schmid, Elena <[email protected]>
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, March 02, 2001 4:39 PM
Subject: FW: Fessler Fesses Up to What Went Wrong in California
>FYI
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alaywan, Ziad
>> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 6:45 PM
>> To: Winter, Terry; Schmid, Elena
>> Subject: FW: Fessler Fesses Up to What Went Wrong in California
>>
>> fyi
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kasarjian, Vicken
>> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 2:56 PM
>> To: Fluckiger, Kellan; Alaywan, Ziad; Detmers, Jim; Bibb, Tracy;
>> Carlson, Trent; McIntosh, Jim; Riley, Ed; Perez, Armando
>> Subject: Fessler Fesses Up to What Went Wrong in California
>>
>> Breaking a lengthy refusal to comment publicly on the California
>> electricity "Perfect Storm," Dan Fessler (chairman and a member of the
>> California Public Utilities Commission from 1991 to December 1996)
>> described to a recent conference in New York why things have gone so awry
>> in the state and what he thinks might now be done.
>> His explanation of why the crisis arose is fairly conventional: a
shortage
>> of generation capacity; grossly erroneous predictions of the timing and
>> strength of the economic recovery in the state; and a fatal decision to
>> separate the California Power Exchange from the California Independent
>> System Operator. That's a policy to which Fessler (now with the meaty
>> LeBouef, Lamb law firm) believes that the PUC should never have agreed.
>> "Little did I realize," he told the meeting, "that the market design to
>> which the commission and legislature had acceded would turn out to bear a
>> striking resemblance to the battle cruiser, that ill-fated darling of
>> virtually every naval power in the period 1910-1914. At Jutland, it was
>> belatedly discovered that these vessels-imbued with attributes of speed
>> and weaponry that made them so appealing on paper-could not take a punch.
>> Their armor was too thin: a fatal design flaw revealed only when they
were
>> tested in battle."
>> So what do we do now? Fessler suggests "a technique which I advocated in
>> 1996 and which remains available for deployment next week. If
successfully
>> implemented, my suggestion would directly assail the vehicle of high
>> prices by enlisting self-interested opportunistic behavior to make the
>> demand curve elastic for the first time in the power crisis.
>> "I propose that California pay large users to get off the system the
>> moment reserves approach Stage One conditions. Demand bidding would
>> replace interruptible tariffs for the simple reason that [the latter]
have
>> not worked."
>
=====================================
|
3,630 |
Subject: Re: talking points on California situation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3738.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 11/21/2000 04:42 PM -----
Steven J Kean
11/18/2000 07:20 AM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron, Christopher J Day/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark
Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: talking points on California situation
Another key point: to avoid the mistakes of California, policy makers must
make it easy to site and interconnect new generation. In California peak
demand rose by about 5500 MW from 1996 - 2000. The market responded with
porposed capacity additions of about 11000 MW. Most of these facilities are
working thier way through the tangle of state and local approvals. The
problems we saw in California did not need to occur if policy makers simply
enabled the market to work. Also, it's worth noting that the deregulated
market did work. Customers who signed with Enron saw a lower bill than
prederegulation, Enron hedged its commitments and so our customers (and
Enron) did just fine during the summer. Deregulation worked; the problems in
California can be directly traced to continued regulatory interference in the
market.
Susan J Mara
11/17/2000 06:09 PM
To: Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron, Christopher J Day/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Dawson/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: talking points on California situation
Mark,
Here's my shot. I did it in Revision mode so you can see the changes. Note
that Enron never got out of the retail market in CA and has gathered about
1,000 MW of retail load -- we're bigger than all but two of the municipal
utilities in the state. Enron stopped marketing to residential consumers --
that's what all the fuss was about in 1997. Anyone else feel free to take
your own shot.
Sue
Mark Schroeder@ECT
11/17/2000 09:52 AM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul
Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Christopher J Day/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron
Subject: talking points on California situation
Some of our people get asked on the phone about what is going on in
California. I have drafted the attached paper for their use. It is intended
to be simple and user-friendly. Your thoughts on whether I achieved that
objectvie are welcome. More importantly, I need you to confimr that I got
the story and facts correct, and that I have not said anything about the
situation that you (Enron USA) would not want to say, or have not said, or if
we have said something fundamentally different, I need to know that, too.
thanks for taking the time to review. mcs
=====================================
|
3,631 |
Subject: CPUC Agenda
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/971.
=====================================
It seems that Wood is going to have a PD on the agenda implementing the=20
Alpert Davis Bill. A draft has not yet been released. see below for a summe=
ry=20
of items of interest.=20
Electric=20
SDG&E Bill Cap: This decision provides an expanded rate stabilization plan=
=20
for ratepayers of San Diego Gas & Electric Company, retroactive to June 1,=
=20
2000. This plan applies to residential, small commercial, and street=20
lighting customers, including those customers defined as "general acute car=
e=20
hospitals" and customers defined as public or private schools for pupils=20
serving grades=20
K-12, and all accounts on Rate Schedule AL-TOU. This decision also=20
establishes a voluntary program for large commercial, agricultural, and=20
industrial customers. The accounting procedure for tracking these costs an=
d=20
revenues is clarified.
PAP: This decision adopts a uniform PX credit adder of .007 cents/kwh for a=
ll=20
three utilities. This decision finds that it is unreasonable to exempt=20
wholesale customers from paying their fair share of Reliability Must-Run=20
costs. RAP applications shall be filed annually. The next PX credit=20
adjustment application shall be filed in 2003, if necessary. =20
RAP Alternate: This alternate order is the same as the Proposed Decision,=
=20
except that it adopts a PX procurement credit of 34 cents per kwh.=20
PG&E Billing Implementation Delay: The record lacks support to penalize PG&=
E=20
for delay in implementing weekly calculation of the Power Exchange price=20
attributable to computer information system upgrade problems.=20
Res E-3694 Approval of PG&E's GABA and required entry to be recorded in th=
e=20
Transition Cost Balancing Account, and revisions to some Preliminary=20
Statements..
Res E-3685 Approval of PG&E=01,s request to offer third party meter reading=
=20
services on a nontariffed basis. =20
Res E-3690 Approval of SCE=01,s Voluntary Power Reduction Credit Program.
Res E-3700 Approval in part PG&E=01,s request to modify its Price Responsiv=
e=20
Load Program (E-BID Program).=20
Res E-3701 Approval with modifications of PG&E=01,s request to file new ele=
ctric=20
tariff schedule OBMC-Optional Binding Mandatory Curtailment Plan.
Gas=20
Res G-3290 This resolution approves an increase in Gas Cost Adjustment=20
Billing Factors to compensate for an increase in cost of gas.
SoCalGas Montebello Gas Storage: This decision conditionally approves the=
=20
settlement reached between SoCalGas and the Commission's Consumer Services=
=20
Division. First, the $3,495,000 voluntary monetary contribution SoCalGas i=
s=20
to make for the benefit of certain organizations should instead be paid to=
=20
the General Fund of the State of California. Second, SoCalGas should expan=
d=20
the scope of its ethics course to address a utility's ethical obligations i=
n=20
exercising the power of eminent domain
See attachment for a more detailed summary.
=====================================
|
3,632 |
Subject: Comments to FTC on retail competition
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12173.
=====================================
FYI -
Public comments were recently posted in response to the FTC's February 2001
notice seeking information regarding different regulatory approaches to
competition in the retail sale of electricity. Below is a list of
contributors.
If you are interested, you may view comments at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/eleccompetition/index.htm. We have also
posted the comments on the internal Deregulation Info Central site
(http://eeshou-ln3.ees.enron.com/energyservices/deregulation.nsf/Home+Page/Sta
rt?opendocument).
Alternatively, I have a number of complete sets of all comments (the set
comprises two big binders) at my desk.
Contributors:
Air Conditioning Contractors of America
Allegheny Energy, Inc.(Pamela J. Mills, Esq)
Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (Daniel W. Douglass)
AARP (Martin A. Corry)
Center for the Advancement of Energy Markets (Philip M. Marston)
Cleco Corporation
Coalition for Fair Competition in Rural Markets (Ed Newberry)
Edison Electric Institute (David K. Owens, et al)
Electric Consumers' Alliance (Robert K. Johnson)
Electric Power Supply Association (Julie Simon)
Electricity Consumers Resource Council
Enron Corporation (Robert J. Frank)
Exelon Corporation
Florida Public Service Commission
Green Mountain Energy Company
Illinois Commerce Commission (Randy Rismiller)
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission
Industrial Energy Consumers of Pennsylvania, et al. (David M. Kleppinger)
Maine Public Advocate Office (Stephen G. Ward)
Maine Public Utilities Commission (Thomas L. Welch)
Maryland Office of People's Counsel
Mercatus Center
Michigan Public Service Commission
MidAmerican Energy
Minnesota Power (David J. McMillan)
MG Industries
National Alliance for Fair Competition (Anthony M. Ponticelli)
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (James Bradford
Ramsay, Sharla M. Barklind)
National Energy Marketers Association
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (Pamela Silberstein)
New Jersey Division of the Ratepayer Advocate
New Power Company (Kathleen E. Magruder)
New York State Attorney General (Eliot Spitzer)
Northeast Texas Electric Cooperatice, Inc. (William H. Burchette)
Nuclear Energy Institute (Dave Fisher)
Ohio Consumers' Counsel (Robert S. Tongren)
Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (Andrew S. Tubbs, et al.)
Potomac Electric Power Company (Mindy L. Herman)
Process Gas Consumers Group (Katherine P. Yarbrough)
Public Service Commission of the State of New York (Paul B. Powers)
Reason Public Policy Institute (Lynne Kiesling)
Reliant Energy Retail Services, LLC (Keith M. Sappenfield)
Shell Energy Services Co., L.L.C. (Juditch W. Burrow)
Strategic Energy L.L.C. (Alex Galatic) [
Transmission Access Policy Study Group (Robert C. McDiarmid)
Utility Workers Union of America (Jerrold Oppenheim)
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/02/eleccompetition.htm
=====================================
|
3,633 |
Subject: Tough times breed tough companies
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/569.
=====================================
The subject line of this email is hardly news. How
have companies toughed out past downturns and gone
on to succeed? What did it take in terms of leadership,
strategy and execution for companies to continue growing
and prosper in past downturns? What were the key
differentiators in sales and marketing, human resource
and financing success? As you know from the last email
I sent you, the VentureWire Executive Summit on November
6 in San Jose plans to get the answers to these and many
other questions. We?ve called together a superb roster
of speakers and panelists who have built companies in
difficult times, and positioned them well to ride past
upturns. How will organizations need to be structured
to be ready for when the current market rebounds? Where
is the money to be had until that rebound happens?
Our roster of speakers are supremely well-qualified to
answer these and other pressing questions. Take a
moment to scroll down and see who is speaking and
participating at VentureWire?s Executive Summit. By
clicking on their photos, you will be able to read their
profile and track record. You?d be hard pressed to find
so much talent under one roof anywhere else:
======================================================
Fred W. Alvarez
Partner, Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati
William V. (Bill) Campbell
Chairman, Intuit
Joseph B. Costello
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, think3
Cynthia Ringo
President & CEO, CopperCom
Gordon Eubanks
President & CEO, Oblix
Michael D. Grimes
Managing Director & Co-Head of West Coast Technology,
Morgan Stanley
Ammar Hanafi
Vice President, Corporate Business Development, Cisco
Systems
L. William (Bill) Krause
President, LWK Ventures
Matt L'Heureux
Managing Director & Head of Worldwide Technology M&A,
Goldman Sachs
Charles McMinn
Chairman, Covad Communications
Karl C. (Casey) Powell, Jr.
Independent Consultant
Sanford Robertson
Founder, Francisco Partners
Stephen Smith
Vice Chairman, Broadview Holdings
Leslie Vadasz
Executive VP, Intel Corp. & President, Intel Capital
Kenneth P. Wilcox
President & Chief Executive Officer, Silicon Valley
Bank
======================================================
This unique event is filling up quickly. To register
single (or multiple) places, please click here:
http://events.venturewire.com/summitEvent.asp
Team discounts are available should 3 or more of your
colleagues wish to attend.
I hope you'll be able to join us. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me by
phone or e-mail.
Best Wishes,
Allan Cunningham
Managing Director
VentureWire Events
212-343-1900
[email protected]
======================================================
Interested in Sponsoring this Event?
There are still sponsorships available for this event.
If you would like more information on sponsorship
opportunities please contact Omar Divina at
[email protected] or by phone on 212 343 1900,
=====================================
|
3,634 |
Subject: RE: PowerPoint info
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4260.
=====================================
While I, too, am frustrated at how things turned out, I'm glad your content
overall with the course. Definitely one of the best--if not THE
best--classes I've taken. I really think that we need to get together
tomorrow nite to finalize, but I don't feel like pushing it too much. Your
thoughts?
Best,
Jeff
"Vavrek, Carolyn (US - San Francisco)" <[email protected]>
04/23/2001 07:08 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: RE: PowerPoint info
Apology not necessary! However, you are very kind to consider my
perspective on the group and project. I am certainly a bit frustrated with
how this project is turning out. We should have "white boarded" our ideas
and reached consensus in the very beginning I think. It would have saved
all of us time. I'm counting on Mark to drive this home for us smoothly.
But, at the end of the day, I am pleased with how much I learned in Tasker's
class, which is the ultimate point anyway.
Carolyn M. Vavrek
Manager - Human Capital Advisory Services
Deloitte & Touche
50 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
phone: 415-783-5137
fax: 415-783-8760
e-mail: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 10:05 AM
To: Vavrek, Carolyn (US - San Francisco)
Subject: Re: PowerPoint info
Carolyn:
I wanted to apologize for the way the group dynamic has shaped up. It's
clear to me that you're a bit frustrated, and if I've contributed, I
apologize.
You've done the most work on this project, your contribution has been very
significant, and I personally am not satisfied about the way that the stuff
you've pulled together (and your views) have been included. At some point,
though, it gets tough beating one's head against the wall. Seems to me
that, in a group, everyone should have some of their views
included---that's what groups and compromises are all about. After all,
it's school. We've made a lot of sacrifices to do it, and the point is to
learn.
Anyway, I hope you'll still comment on the presentation, and I'm glad that
you've agreed to do part of it on Thursday. For my part, I felt that I
pushed yesterday about as much as I'm prepared to push and at this point,
I'll put the ratios tables together, offer a few edits, buy don' t see much
use going to the mat.
Overall, I think it'll be an okay presentation, though getting there has
been, well, bumpy.
But thanks very much for all the work you did. It was important, and the
presentation is better off for it.
Best,
Jeff
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If
you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
=====================================
|
3,635 |
Subject: Officials criticize energy report
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28218.
=====================================
FYI. Can we get a copy?
Best,
Jeff
Officials criticize energy report
Posted at 8:06 p.m. PDT Thursday, June 28, 2001
BY CHRIS O'BRIEN
Mercury News
California's energy crisis is expected to increase unemployment, reduce
production and aggravate an already weakening economy, according to
researchers at the University of California-Los Angeles.
The impact, however, will likely depend on how state officials choose to deal
with the failed deregulation scheme. The authors of the report released
Thursday come down heavily in favor of lifting price controls and
dramatically increasing the price consumers pay as a way to reduce the
economic fallout.
``California's economy is sufficiently large and dynamic that it will weather
the current power crisis without being derailed,'' the report says.
``However, our analysis reveals that this impact can be moderated by an
approach that does not shift today's problems to tomorrow.''
The study, ``Short Circuit: Will the California Energy Crisis Derail the
State's Economy,'' came under fierce criticism from Gov. Gray Davis' office.
Steven Maviglio, Davis' spokesman, said many of the assumptions used to
produce the report are either outdated or flat wrong.
``It deserves its rightful place sitting on the shelf gathering dust,''
Maviglio said. ``Like any crystal-ball report, it's essentially irrelevant.''
Edward Lamer, a UCLA professor, and Christopher Thornberg, a visiting
professor at UCLA, collaborated on the report with a team of researchers from
the Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
The study concludes that California's gross state product will be cut by
anywhere from .7 percent to 1.5 percent in 2001 as a result of the energy
crisis. In addition, energy problems will increase unemployment by .5 percent
in 2001 and 1.1 percent in 2002. The report predicts consumers can expect 112
hours of rolling blackouts this year.
However, the report argues that the impact could be dramatically reduced if
the state would raise the price consumers pay for energy to match the
wholesale costs. This could reduce blackouts to 12 hours, lower the debt and
interest the state will have to pay for electricity and encourage investment
in the state to increase energy supplies.
But Peter Navarro, a management professor at the University of
California-Irvine, was skeptical of the report's findings. He said it was
almost impossible to build models complex enough to take into account all the
factors that affect energy prices in the state.
In addition, he said the report seems to assume that there is no manipulation
of the current market, which Navarro argues could be distorting prices as
well.
``How do you justify raising retail rates to 45 cents for power that costs a
nickel to generate when there is some evidence that the market is flawed?''
Navarro said. ``This report seems to have an industry point of view and an
industry agenda.''
=====================================
|
3,636 |
Subject: SDG&E Application to Implement AB 265
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1392.
=====================================
On item #1, I don't believe they have the latitude through an application
to change the statute language. However, that is not our issue to raise.
I don't believe we have a problem with items #2 and 3. On item #4, I also
don't think we should be raising this, but I think it is a loser to say,
"we keep all the upside and pass through all of the downside".
The only thing we may wish to protest is the amortization of any
undercollected balance in 18 months. Considering the potential size of the
undercollection, that quick a recovery could raise prices significantly and
affect our deals. Also may be rate shock.
We have 30 days from October 24 to file comments. Let me know any other
thoughts
---------------------- Forwarded by Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron on 11/02/2000
07:04 PM ---------------------------
JMB <[email protected]> on 10/27/2000 05:58:52 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc: MBD <[email protected]>
Subject: SDG&E Application to Implement AB 265
On October 24, 2000, SDG&E applied to the Commission for an order
implementing Assembly Bill 265. SDG&E states that while Commission
Decision
00-09-040 implemented the rate ceiling required by that bill, it did not
take any additional steps to "protect against a simple deferral of payment
by future customers," consistent with AB 265 Section 1(b). Accordingly,
SEDGE requests that the Commission take the following additional steps:
1. Establish a rate freeze (as oppose to a ceiling) of 6.5 cent/kWh. SDG&E
estimates that a freeze will result in an undercollection of approximately
$500 million through 2002 instead of the $630 million undercollection which
a rate ceiling will generate.
2. The Commission should authorize SDG&E to use all the financial and
physical tools available in the marketplace to procure energy for bundled
service customers.
3. The Commission should provide guidance for SDG&E's exercise of its
procurement function (e.g., price stability v. least cost procurement).
4. In implementing Section 332.1(c), which requires SDG&E to "utilize
revenue associated with sales of energy from utility owned or managed
generation assets to offset any undercollection" resulting from the rate
ceiling/cap, the Commission should (a) preserve the historic allocation of
such revenues (which is approximately 60% to customers below 100 kw and the
remainder to those above) by requiring that SDG&E only apply 60% of these
revenues to such undercollection, and (b) not require SDG&E to use revenue
from post-AB 1890 power purchase contracts to offset the undercollection
resulting from the rate ceiling/cap.
5. Allow SDG&E to amortize any remaining undercollection resulting from the
rate ceiling/cap in no more than 18 moths after that ceiling/cap ends.
Please call if you have any questions.
If you would like a copy of the application, let me know (unfortunately I
do
not have it on e-mail, but it is only 18 pages long).
Jeanne
=====================================
|
3,637 |
Subject: RE: CAISO NOTICE: Delay In Publishing Real Time Energy Notices
Sender: legal <[email protected]>
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1537.
=====================================
Dunn better get busy, March elections are just around the corner.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 5:18 PM
To: Steffes, James D.; Mara, Susan; Shapiro, Richard; Alvarez, Ray; Perrino, Dave; Shortridge, Pat; Hall, Steve C. (Legal)
Subject: RE: CAISO NOTICE: Delay In Publishing Real Time Energy Notices
In other interesting news, you may have heard that Senator Dunn subpoened the old ISO Board, and intended to question them in secret to uncover more evidence of conspiracies, etc. (if you haven't heard, the new scapegoat is the ISO staff and the Board).
The ISO staff and its CEO Terry Winter have announced that they want their testimony to be public rather than secret, with the press present. In testimony last week, staff apparently told the subcommittee "that they felt pressured to provide DWR with market information not available to others."
We'll see if transcripts are available. FERC Enforcement may have an interest.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James D.
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 5:12 PM
To: Mara, Susan; Shapiro, Richard; Dasovich, Jeff; Alvarez, Ray; Perrino, Dave
Subject: RE: CAISO NOTICE: Delay In Publishing Real Time Energy Notices
We should inform FERC Enforcement. No formal filings.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Mara, Susan
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 5:07 PM
To: Steffes, James D.; Shapiro, Richard; Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: FW: CAISO NOTICE: Delay In Publishing Real Time Energy Notices
Importance: High
This is so-o-o blatant.
-----Original Message-----
From: Perrino, Dave
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 2:47 PM
To: Comnes, Alan; Mara, Susan
Cc: Alvarez, Ray
Subject: FW: CAISO NOTICE: Delay In Publishing Real Time Energy Notices
Importance: High
Normally I'd say this is unbelievable...but considering who sent it, I can't say I'm surprised...
Ray,
Should we take this up with Bob Pease, or since it was inadequate to begin with, just forget it?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: "Payton, Julia" <[email protected]>@ENRON
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 2:43 PM
To: ISO Market Participants
Subject: CAISO NOTICE: Delay In Publishing Real Time Energy Notices
ISO Market Participants:
MARKET NOTICE
November 5, 2001
Publication of Real Time Energy Information
ISO Market Participants
SC Settlement Contacts
Last Friday, the ISO informed you that effective today it would begin
publishing on OASIS additional information about real time energy purchases.
Based on concerns and issues raised by CERS and the State of California, the
ISO is delaying this publication. We will provide you with additional
information later this week.
If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact
Byron Woertz at [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or (916)
608-7066.
Client Relations Communications
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
=====================================
|
3,638 |
Subject: FW: EMP competition from Enron
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: []
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/115.
=====================================
This doesn't look like you were negotiating with us in good faith on
Energy Marketplace.......
> Enron Launches Global Web-Based Commodity Trading Site
> October 26, 1999 11:49 AM EDT
> HOUSTON, Oct. 26 /PRNewswire/ -- Enron (NYSE: ENE
> </v1?pcnexec=Browser/http://cgi.entrypoint.com/cgi-bin/ep_comp_link_articl
> es.cgi?location=www.entrypoint.com/stock/stock_summary.asp&exc=usa::&tkr=E
> NE>) announced today the launch of EnronOnline, a global Internet-based
> transaction system for wholesale energy and other commodities. EnronOnline
> will allow participants to not only view commodity prices in real-time but
> also to directly transact with Enron over the Internet free of commission.
> The transaction system will go live on Nov. 29, 1999, with the launch of
> North America natural gas to be followed by all other products over the
> next six weeks.
> "EnronOnline offers customers the next level of wholesale energy
> transaction service by having easy and simple access to Enron's prices and
> products," said Jeffrey K. Skilling, president and COO of Enron. "This
> Internet system complements Enron's extensive marketing capabilities and
> gives our counterparties the choice of transacting over the telephone or
> instantly through our website."
> Enron's customers across the world will be able to access several hundred
> traded products through EnronOnline. The company will leverage its
> wholesale market expertise to publish real-time prices for power, natural
> gas, coal, weather products, liquids, petrochemicals, pulp and paper,
> emission credits and other commodities in the Americas, Europe and Asia.
> It will continue expanding web-based commodity and product offerings
> globally.
> "Unlike other Internet commodity service providers, EnronOnline doesn't
> match buyers with sellers," said Skilling. "Customers will be able to
> instantaneously conduct transactions directly with an Enron company as a
> principal."
> Real-time capabilities in the United States will be delivered wherever
> possible through Enron Communication, Inc.'s intelligent fiber optic
> network. This system is designed to combat web latency and create a true
> real-time environment online for Enron's customers.
> A preview of the system is currently available at www.EnronOnline.com
> <http://www.EnronOnline.com>.
> Enron is one of the world's leading electricity, natural gas and
> communications companies. The company, which owns approximately $34
> billion in energy and communications assets, produces electricity and
> natural gas, develops, constructs and operates energy facilities
> worldwide, delivers physical commodities and financial and risk management
> services to customers around the world, and is developing an intelligent
> network platform to facilitate online business. Enron's Internet address
> is www.enron.com <http://www.enron.com> and the stock is traded under the
> ticker symbol, "ENE."
>
- att-1.htm
=====================================
|
3,639 |
Subject: Important CAISO Notice re confidentiality
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2719.
=====================================
FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 10/26/2000 08:54 AM
---------------------------
Mary Hain
10/26/2000 08:45 AM
To: Richard Sanders, [email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Important CAISO Notice re confidentiality
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 10/26/2000 08:51 AM
---------------------------
Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
From: "Fuller, Don" <[email protected]>@caiso.com>
10/25/2000 05:23 PM
Please respond to "Sole, Jeanne" <[email protected]>
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: CAISO Notice - ISO response to CPUC and AG subpoenas in the inves
tigations of the wholesale electric market and impacts on retail rates
To Market Participants and Scheduling Coordinators:
Attached please find a letter from the California Attorney General (AG)
indicating the confidential treatment that will be provided for confidential
data produced by the CA ISO in response to the AG subpoena (circulated to
Market Participants on October 6 and attached herein for your convenience).
Further, the CA ISO is in receipt of an interim order from the California
Public Utilities Commission in its OII 00-08-002, providing for additional
protection for confidential information, including information subject to
the subpoena issued to the CA ISO (circulated to Market Participants on
September 25 and attached herein for your convenience).
Finally, the EOB has requested copies of the ISO operator logs and morning
reports that are responsive to the CPUC subpoena. These documents would be
subject to the agreement as to confidentiality for confidential information
produced to the EOB that was arrived at this summer (see letter circulated
to Market Participants on September 25 and attached herein for your
convenience)
The CA ISO will proceed with production in response to the AG and CPUC
subpoenas (and provision of responsive logs and morning reports to the EOB)
unless we are informed, no later than noon on Monday October 30, by a Market
Participant that it is taking formal action to seek further protection for
confidential material from the CPUC, the AG or the EOB.
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.
- 10-25caisoconfidential1025.doc
- 10-6AGSubpoena.pdf
- 9-25EOB4.pdf
- 10-25CPUCsubpoena.doc
=====================================
|
3,640 |
Subject: Re: Solve IOU Undercollection with a Mere 10% Average Rate
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5197.
=====================================
Jeff --
Some questions -
1. The $10 Billion looks low. Is there anyway to use something the UDCs=20
would have on file?
2. What interest rate is embedded within the mortgage? Does this assume th=
e=20
benefits of securitization?
3. What are the appropriate rate mechanisms? The UDCs will need to be able=
=20
to convince Wall Street that this rate component is "good" for the collecti=
on.
4. We need to include going forward costs of CDWR in this model - how much=
=20
money will rates need to raise to cover current expenses?
5. Does the kwh load include Direct Access customers? Will this rate=20
component be non-bypassable?
Jim
=09Jeff Dasovich
=09Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
=0902/26/2001 06:50 PM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: [email protected], Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D=20
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected],=
=20
Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John=20
Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron=
,=20
Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie=20
Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: Solve IOU Undercollection with a Mere 10% Average Rate Incr=
ease?
Greetings:
Please review the attached. It's a summary I've put together of a very=20
lengthy analysis MRW did for us over the weekend. I've also attached the=
=20
considerably lengthier MRW memo for those who'd like to see it. The tables=
=20
included in the summary are pulled directly from the MRW memo. The analysi=
s=20
only addresses the utilities undercollection (i.e., solvency) and doesn't=
=20
address any additional increases that might result from DWR's buying=20
activities.
The Bottom Line
=06=15 By raising average rates 10% over a 10-year period, California could=
1)=20
return the utilities to solvency, and 2) help close the supply-demand gap =
by=20
providing customers with better price signals.
=06=15 California could achieve these goals under this new rate structure a=
nd at=20
the same time exclude one-third of residential customers from any increase=
s.=20
If California chose not to exclude any customers from the new rate structur=
e,=20
California would only need to raise average rates by about 8.8%.
=06=15 This level of increase is in line with increases enacted in other st=
ates=20
(e.g., Washington: 28-34%; Montana: 4.5-32%; Idaho: 6.0-24%; Nevada:=20
7-12.5%; New Mexico 12%).
We'll need to look at it critically and try to shoot holes in it before goi=
ng=20
public with the numbers as part of our broader effort, but it offers a=20
reasonable benchmark against which to judge alternatives (like spending the=
=20
kids lunch money on crumbling, broken down transmission systems).
Please provide feedback as soon as possible, and perhaps, Paul we conclude=
=20
the MRW work on the agenda for discussion on tomorrow's daily conference ca=
ll.
Best,
Jeff
- Undercollection assessment final.doc
=====================================
|
3,641 |
Subject: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: SoCal Ed To Consider Litigation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', "nicholas.o'[email protected]", '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1911.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Miyung Buster/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 09/29/2000 03:12 PM
-----
[email protected]
09/26/2000 02:00 PM
Please respond to nobody
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: SoCal Ed To Consider Litigation
To Recover Power Costs
[IMAGE]
SoCal Ed To Consider Litigation To Recover Power Costs
?
09/26/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones&Company, Inc.)
LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Southern California Edison said if the state's
Public Utilities Commission doesn't allow the utility to recover about $2
billion in unpaid power costs when a state imposed rate freeze is lifted it
will consider litigation to ensure recovery of electricity costs, according
to a filing made late Monday with the Security and Exchange Commission.
"The CPUC has denied requests by (Southern California Edison) and other
California utility companies to allow recovery of the transition revenue
account undercollections after the end of the statutory rate freeze," the SEC
filing states. "These decisions pre-dated the unforseen run-up in wholesale
market prices beyond the level of prices that should have been produced by
functioning competitive markets."
SoCal Edison consumers are currently paying a fixed rate for electricity as
required by the state's landmark 1996 deregulation law, which is far below
the 20 cent/KWh wholesale rate SoCal Edison pays to procure the power from
energy producers. As a result, the company's debt is growing by several
million dollars a day.
If the company is unable to recoup the money from its ratepayers,
shareholders would be responsible for the costs, said SoCal Edison chief
financial officer John Scilacci.
The company would go to court seeking authority to have its customers pay
back the debt, if required, rather than hold its shareholders liable,
Scilacci said.
SoCal Edison said in the SEC filing that it has used "virtually all of its
CPUC-authorized capacity for short-term borrowing."
The utility is restructuring its loan arrangements to allow for additional
"short-term borrowing capacity to meet its liquidity needs."
The utility has recently received a negative rating from several Wall Street
debt rating agencies.
-By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires;
323-658-3874;[email protected]
Folder Name: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation
Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 95
______________________________________________________________________
To review or revise your folder, visit Dow Jones CustomClipsor contact Dow
Jones Customer Service by e-mail at [email protected] by phone
at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact
your local sales representative.)
______________________________________________________________________
Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones &Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
=====================================
|
3,642 |
Subject: Re: REVISED Merged Leg Document
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/11904.
=====================================
No intent to make people pay twice. Anticipated that Edison might not want
to be at risk for costs associated with retail gen service (e.g., AS, GMC,
shaping) while only allowed to charge the wholesale price. Any changes
necessary to ensure no double counting are welcome.
Also, if 30 days seems to short to for some customers do strike a deal with
either the utility or an ESP, then it might be appropriate, and I wouldn't
object, to extending it to 90 days. In my conversation with Dorothy, both 30
and 90 came up. 90 is reasonable, but it would seem to be the uppermost
limit.
Thanks very much for the comments.
Best,
Jeff
BRBarkovich <[email protected]>
07/09/2001 06:12 PM
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected], "'Dorothy Rothrock (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>,
"'John Fielder (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Phil Isenberg (E-mail)'"
<[email protected]>, "'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Keith
McCrea (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'Linda Sherif (E-mail)'"
<[email protected]>, "'Linda Sherif (E-mail 2)'" <[email protected]>, "'Gary
Schoonyan (E-mail)'" <[email protected]>, "'John White (E-mail)'"
<[email protected]>, "Dominic DiMare (E-mail)"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: REVISED Merged Leg Document
I do not agree with Jeff's changes to Dorothy's language and I am not sure if
Dorothy does.
In particular, I don't know what is meant by the language in the definition
of Spot Market
Service which says "and shall include all costs incurred by the electrical
corporation to
provide retail electric service" which seems to me to go way beyond even
energy service. I
am also concerned that there be no way that customers have to pay for A/S
twice.
Second, I think 30 days is too short a time for a customer on Spot Market
service to elect
DA or Term Service, since if the UDC is providing Term Service on a best
efforts basis, that
option might not even be available within 30 days. Barbara
Delaney Hunter wrote:
> Folks-
> Sorry for the delay --- major computer problems over here. I have used Ann's
> document and added the changes I made as a template. It is in redline and
> the questions are highlighted as well. Please look over it carefully and if
> there is language you are going to provide please do it post haste.
>
> WE WILL NOT HAVE A 2:00 CALL --- I think most folks are just too damn busy.
> So, if there is a question, problem, disagreement, etc on language please
> work it out amongst yourselves and send me new language if applicable.
> Remember this is due to Rick BY 5:00 PM TODAY!!!!!
>
> Call me with questions,
> Delaney
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: REVISED Merged Leg Language.doc
> REVISED Merged Leg Language.doc Type: Microsoft Word Document
(application/msword)
> Encoding: base64
=====================================
|
3,643 |
Subject: Fwd: FERC To Discuss Possible Changes To West Pwr Price Caps
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/902.
=====================================
--------- Inline attachment follows ---------
From: <[email protected]>
To: Aryeh Fishman <[email protected]>, Andrea Settanni <[email protected]>, Charles Ingebretson <[email protected]>, Charles Shoneman <[email protected]>, Deanna King <[email protected]>, Dan Watkiss <[email protected]>, Gene Godley <[email protected]>, Kimberly Curry <[email protected]>, Michael Pate <[email protected]>, Marc F. Racicot <[email protected]>, Paul Fox <[email protected]>, Ronald Carroll <[email protected]>, Shelby Kelley <[email protected]>, Scott Segal <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, October 18, 2001 1:48:25 GMT
Subject:
FYI
FERC To Discuss Possible Changes To West Pwr Price Caps
Updated: Thursday, October 18, 2001 08:16 AM ET
(This article was originally published Wednesday)
By Jason Leopold and Andrew Dowell
OF DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--Federal energy regulators said this week they will discuss possible changes to price controls the agency imposed on western wholesale power markets in June.
Western utilities complained that the price controls, based on the price of generating power in California, aren't appropriate for the entire region. In particular, demand in the Northwest rises sharply in the winter, while California's power demand and cost are typically highest in the summer.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said in a notice its Oct. 29 meeting discussions could include an elimination of the 10% premium allowed for sales into California and changes to the way the price caps are adjusted.
T
he price cap is set at about $92 a megawatt-hour and is calculated by taking the 85% of the most expensive hourly price during the most-recent Stage 1 power emergency in California, when operating reserves fall below 7%.
Gov. Gray Davis lobbied hard for FERC to impose price caps throughout the entire western U.S., saying generators would sell their power to other western states if California were the only state with price controls.
"The governor would be very disappointed if FERC contributed to additional economic uncertainty, particularly in these troubling times" if the agency were to lift the price restrictions, said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis.
Last summer, Sierra Pacific Resources (SRP, news, msgs) unit Nevada Power was forced to initiate rolling blackouts to a small number of customers for about 45 minutes because of the new price caps imposed on the market by FERC and blistering heat, said Paul Heagen, Sierra Pacific's chief spokesman.
I
n addition, some generators, including a unit of Enron Corp. (ENE, news, msgs), scrapped plans to build small power plants, the so-called peaking units used when demand for electricity is at its highest, in the western U.S. because of the price controls.
-By Jason Leopold and Andrew Dowell, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,644 |
Subject: nan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/363.
=====================================
THIRD EXTRAORDINARY SESSION CALLED
Governor Davis has called a special session on Tuesday, October 9 to consider and act upon legislation affecting the operation, maintenance, finances, and financial viability of investor-owned utilities that provide electricity or natural gas to California residents and businesses, including their procurement portfolios and practices, and service by alternate energy providers in their service territory.
Extraordinary (Special) Session Rules and Procedures
Call of Special Session:
Only the Governor has the authority to convene a special session of the Legislature. In convening the session, the Governor must issue a proclamation outlining the reasons for the special session, and only issues specified in the proclamation may be acted upon.
Election of Special Session Officers, Committees and Bill Referrals:
The election of officers and the appointment of special session committees are separate from the Legislature's regular session. In some instances, special session committees are comprised of different committee members than those appointed to regular session committees.
Identification of Special Session Bills and Publications:
Separate record-keeping publications (File, History, Journal and Roll Call) are printed for each individual extraordinary session. Special session bills are identified by specific paper colors (i.e. blue or green). For example, documents in the 2001 Second Extraordinary Session are printed on green paper.
Introduction of Special Session Bills:
There is no limit to the number of bills that a member of the Legislature may introduce during the extraordinary session, and none of the bills introduced during the extraordinary session count toward the member's bill limit in the Regular Session.
Special Session Bill Procedures and Calendars:
There is no bill introduction deadline during special sessions, and the "30-day in print" rule and committee file notice requirements do not apply. Special session bills also are not subject to the regular legislative session calendar, committee and/or floor deadlines. The sine die deadline requiring session to adjourn on November 30 of the second year of a legislative session does apply to the Special Session.
Effective Date of Special Session Legislation:
Simple majority vote special session bills take effect on the 91st day after the special session is adjourned. Urgency measures and other two-thirds majority-vote bills take effect immediately upon the Governor's signature. The Governor has 12 days from the date it is received on his desk to sign or veto legislation. Similar to the Regular Session, a special session bill may become law without the Governor's signature.
End of Special Session:
Only the Legislature, by concurrent resolution, may end a special session. The concurrent resolution takes effect upon passage by both houses of the Legislature, and is not subject to a Governor's signature or veto.
=====================================
|
3,645 |
Subject: Re: Final Version-Manifesto
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8544.
=====================================
David:
Count on us as signatories (Carl, John, and I), however there is a need to
correct two factual errors. These corrections do not change the sense of
any of the discussions or our suggested remedies, but are important for our
credibility.
First, the utilities were not required to sell or divest their plants. The
Commission and the Legislature lacked the authority to do so, however, the
divestitures were encouraged in the strongest possible terms. Therefore,
at page 2 , third line in the last paragraph, we need to change the word
"required" to "strongly encouraged." Likewise, on page 4, the third
sentence of the second paragraph under the section heading needs to be
slightly modified to read as follows: "First, California required
utilities to purchase nearly all their electricity on a volatile spot basis
after they divested a substantial portion of their generation...."
Finally, on page 5, the third sentence should be modified as follows:
"These divestitures, encouraged and sanctioned by the CPUC, ...."
Second, also on page 5, the second sentence inaccurately conveys that
utilities had the authority and option to pursue "backstop" fixed price
contracts from their divested plants. In fact, they were precluded from
doing so under the rules. Furthermore, the utilities have only divested
their fossil plants, while retaining both hydro and nuclear facilities.
These facilities represent substantial generation assets, especially for
SCE and PG&E. Accordingly, we suggest the following minor modifications:
"Unfortunately, the utilities have already divested (strikethrough: most
of their) generation plants without being allowed to secure contracts that
would...."
We also note that the document has not referenced the substantial new
generation capacity that has been approved and scheduled for completion
within the next two years. If completed (and assuming interim solutions
don't undermine the investment incentives in the meantime), these additions
would add over 6,000 MW of critically needed generation capacity. The
document should include some reference to this point. Accordingly, we
suggest the following modification on page 6, the last sentence in full
paragraph 4: "Only then should we seek contracts to help stabilize prices
for the two-or three-year transition until more permanent solutions can be
put in place, especially as new power plants already approved (totalling
some 6,000 MW ) come on line within the next two years.
Lastly, we noted a few typos. On page 5, first line of the second
paragraph under the heading has a dash after "short" which appears
unintended. On page 7, sixth sentence of the second paragraph,
"Californians' " shouldn't have an apostrophe. Finally, in the paragraph
that follows on page 7, we use the term "UDC" for the first time without
explanation. We suggest saying "utilities" instead.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks for the great work!
Mitch
=====================================
|
3,646 |
Subject: SDG&E Application to Implement AB 265
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2984.
=====================================
On item #1, I don't believe they have the latitude through an application to
change the statute language. However, that is not our issue to raise. I
don't believe we have a problem with items #2 and 3. On item #4, I also
don't think we should be raising this, but I think it is a loser to say, "we
keep all the upside and pass through all of the downside".
The only thing we may wish to protest is the amortization of any
undercollected balance in 18 months. Considering the potential size of the
undercollection, that quick a recovery could raise prices significantly and
affect our deals. Also may be rate shock.
We have 30 days from October 24 to file comments. Let me know any other
thoughts
---------------------- Forwarded by Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron on 11/02/2000
07:04 PM ---------------------------
JMB <[email protected]> on 10/27/2000 05:58:52 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc: MBD <[email protected]>
Subject: SDG&E Application to Implement AB 265
On October 24, 2000, SDG&E applied to the Commission for an order
implementing Assembly Bill 265. SDG&E states that while Commission Decision
00-09-040 implemented the rate ceiling required by that bill, it did not
take any additional steps to "protect against a simple deferral of payment
by future customers," consistent with AB 265 Section 1(b). Accordingly,
SEDGE requests that the Commission take the following additional steps:
1. Establish a rate freeze (as oppose to a ceiling) of 6.5 cent/kWh. SDG&E
estimates that a freeze will result in an undercollection of approximately
$500 million through 2002 instead of the $630 million undercollection which
a rate ceiling will generate.
2. The Commission should authorize SDG&E to use all the financial and
physical tools available in the marketplace to procure energy for bundled
service customers.
3. The Commission should provide guidance for SDG&E's exercise of its
procurement function (e.g., price stability v. least cost procurement).
4. In implementing Section 332.1(c), which requires SDG&E to "utilize
revenue associated with sales of energy from utility owned or managed
generation assets to offset any undercollection" resulting from the rate
ceiling/cap, the Commission should (a) preserve the historic allocation of
such revenues (which is approximately 60% to customers below 100 kw and the
remainder to those above) by requiring that SDG&E only apply 60% of these
revenues to such undercollection, and (b) not require SDG&E to use revenue
from post-AB 1890 power purchase contracts to offset the undercollection
resulting from the rate ceiling/cap.
5. Allow SDG&E to amortize any remaining undercollection resulting from the
rate ceiling/cap in no more than 18 moths after that ceiling/cap ends.
Please call if you have any questions.
If you would like a copy of the application, let me know (unfortunately I do
not have it on e-mail, but it is only 18 pages long).
Jeanne
=====================================
|
3,647 |
Subject: RE: CA Extenstions/Amendments
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1574.
=====================================
PG&E also mentioned it. Here is the excerpt from its commnets on the Wood ACR filed 11/2/01.
1. What effect, if any, should be given to renewals of contracts originally entered into prior to the effective date of the Commission's suspension of direct access?
An appropriate charge on direct access customers obviates the need to regulate renewals of direct access contracts entered into on or before September 20, 2001. Absent the charge, the Commission would need to address what kind of renewals should be covered by any potential prohibition against renewals. Prohibited renewals could include (1) renewal of contracts whose terms expire without any provisions for extension; and (2) renegotiation within the contract term of any material term or condition of the contract, including price. The Commission would also need to consider whether an interim prohibition on renewals is needed to stop renegotiations or renewals that are very likely underway already, pending final Commission action.
-----Original Message-----
From: Smith, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 10:10 AM
To: Mara, Susan
Cc: Dasovich, Jeff; Steffes, James D.; Frazier, Lamar; Blachman, Jeremy
Subject: RE: CA Extenstions/Amendments
thanks. this is really important to the restructures we are working on.
From: Susan J Mara/ENRON@enronXgate on 11/07/2001 12:07 PM
To: Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/ENRON@enronXgate, James D Steffes/ENRON@enronXgate
cc: Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/ENRON@enronxgate
Subject: RE: CA Extenstions/Amendments
SCE and PG&E have raised these questions. The questions came up at a meeting with the utilities on Oct 2 and again on OCt 25 -- SCE went so far as to say that in a response filed last week, I believe. The questions arise because, once you have a date cutting off direct access -- what can be allowed thereafter and what can't? Once DA, always DA? (we say) What consitutes a written DA "contract". (the utilities ask) You'd think the utilities would have better things to spend their time on. Actually, SCE most likely benefits (pays off its debts sooner) if it can capture more customers. These are similar to issues Commissioner Wood is investigating and may result in a decision along those lines that goes to the Commission for a vote. We are opposing as are 95% of the customer groups. A pre-hearing conf is being held at 2 pm today with Wood's friendly ALJ to talk further about these type of issues. I will keep you apprised.
Sue
-----Original Message-----
From: Smith, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 9:47 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Mara, Susan; Steffes, James D.
Cc: Frazier, Lamar; Blachman, Jeremy
Subject: CA Extenstions/Amendments
I heard that the CPUC and/or the utilities have taken the position that any amendment to a contract after 9/20, like a pricing amendment, is a new contract entered after 9/20 and therefore invalid. Is this true? Does this hold any water?
=====================================
|
3,648 |
Subject: Re: FERC Investigation on California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2077.
=====================================
Thanks, Sarah. Question: Could we, and should we, attempt to pre-empt the
FERC report and try to get press coverage of the BP paper before FERC
releases the results of its investigation?
Sarah Novosel
10/04/2000 11:58 AM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L
Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FERC Investigation on California
This is just a rumor, but we heard on the EPSA call today that Scott Miller
is trying to get his report on the California part of his investigation to
the Commissioners by Friday of this week.
Also, the EPSA/Boston Pacific paper continues to be revised, but EPSA wants
to get it to FERC as soon as possible (but if Scott completes his report by
Friday it may not be in time for Scott's report), so they have asked us to
review the report and Executive Summary and get comments back to them for a
conference call on Friday. Since we will be at FERC during the EPSA call, we
will need to get any comments we may have to Julie by Thursday evening or
Friday morning.
Thanks everyone.
Sarah
---------------------- Forwarded by Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron on 10/04/2000
11:06 AM ---------------------------
"Jackie Gallagher" <[email protected]> on 10/04/2000 09:35:45 AM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Boston Pacific Statistical Research Project
MEMORANDUM
TO: Regulatory Affairs Committee
Power Marketing Working Group
FROM: Don Santa, Regulatory Affairs Committee Chair
Joe Hartsoe, Power Marketing Working Group Chair
Julie Simon, Vice President of Policy
Mark Bennett, Senior Manager of Policy
DATE: October 4, 2000
RE: Boston Pacific Statistical Research Project
Attached is the latest draft of the full Boston Pacific statistical research
project, reflecting the comments made by EPSA members. Both clean and
redlined versions are attached. There are two major changes in the project:
1) the seven-page summary is the Executive Summary of the report; and 2) all
cost estimates for new peakers have been removed.
Please review the documents so we can discuss them on a conference call on
Friday, October 6th at 11:00 a.m. EST and then release it to Scott Miller for
the FERC investigation. Please dial 1-800-937-6563 and ask for the Julie
Simon/EPSA call. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Julie
Simon at 202-789-7200 or [email protected] before the Friday call.
Attachments
Jacqueline Gallagher
Research/Policy Assistant
Electric Power Supply Association
1401 H Street, NW
Suite 760
Washington, DC 20005
202.789.7200
202.789.7201
[email protected]
=====================================
|
3,649 |
Subject: [RESEND] INVITATION - SVMG April Breakfast Club, April 24, 2001
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11030.
=====================================
Apologies, in case you have previously received and responded to this
message. -M
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear Silicon Valley Breakfast Club Member:
Please plan to join us for the April meeting of the Silicon Valley Breakfas=
t
Club, scheduled for Tuesday, April 24, from 8:15am until 10am, hosted by
EPRI in their Cafeteria located on their campus at 3412 Hillview Ave in Pal=
o
Alto. Our host requests attendees please park in the parking lot above
Building 1.
Our speaker this month is Bob Therkelsen of the California Energy Commissio=
n
(CEC). Bob Therkelsen is the Deputy Director for the Systems Assessment an=
d
Facilities Siting Division at the CEC. He manages the staff and programs
responsible for carrying out the Commission's energy facility siting and
compliance monitoring functions. Mr. Therkelsen has worked at the Energy
Commission since 1975 as a technical expert, project manager, supervisor,
and manager. Prior to joining the Energy Commission, he worked as a
wildlife ecologist and environmental consultant. Mr. Therkelsen has a
Bachelors of Science in Biological Science from the University of Californi=
a
at Irvine and a Masters of Science in Ecology from the University of
California at Davis.
Mr. Therkelsen will brief us on the ten generation facilities that have bee=
n
approved during the past 18 months and where each is in the construction
process, and the 14 generation facilities currently working through the CEC
process. Everyone agrees this new generation is a key part of the long-ter=
m
solution to the energy crisis. Don't miss this presentation on major
generation facilities and how quickly each will come on-line!
The Silicon Valley Breakfast Club is a monthly gathering of District Staff
Members from State and Federal offices and Member Company representatives o=
f
the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group (as well as representatives from our
Chambers of Commerce and other top trade associations representing our
region). Each month=01,s meeting starts with a half-hour of coffee and
conversation, followed by a top speaker on a topic of interest to everyone,
and then a roundtable discussion of the hot issues being discussed in your
offices in both Sacramento and Washington. Please mark your calendars for
the fourth Tuesday of each month from 8:15 a.m., until 10:00 a.m., and pla=
n
to join us. Locations vary as each month is hosted by a different employer
or association.
So that we can plan accordingly, please call the Manufacturing Group office=
s
at 408-501-7864 to confirm your attendance no later than Thursday, April 19=
,
or you can e-mail your response to [email protected].
For directions to ERPI please access our Breakfast Club web page at
http://www.svmg.org/protected/bfast_club/index_f.htm.
When the dialog box pops up, please enter the following:
user: breakfast
passcode: breakfastmember
We look forward to seeing you on Tuesday morning, April 24th!
=====================================
|
3,650 |
Subject: April Signature Interactive Events
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11311.
=====================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Signature Interactive Events
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING EVENTS
Simple Options Strategies for Today's Market
Thursday, April 26
4:30 p.m. ET, 1:30 p.m. PT
In today's uncertain market, a new approach may be what you need.
Schwab invites you to a Signature Services options trading=20
seminar featuring Jim Bittman, Senior Instructor of the Options=20
Institute, Tony Saliba, renowned options trader and derivatives=20
pioneer, and Gregory Miller, Senior Vice President of Schwab=20
Options.
Learn more about simple options strategies =0F- what they are, when=20
to deploy them, and how to get started.
Don't miss this opportunity to ask questions and interact=20
directly with options experts and see how Schwab can help support=20
your options trading needs.
To register for the online seminar and to submit questions prior=20
to the event, log on to:
http://schwab.ed10.net/ud/AY7Q/A7FV/V12M/VU/42KGY,=20
select 'Signature Events,' and then click on 'Simple Options=20
Strategies for Today's Market' to:.
=0F=07 Register for the event.=20
=0F=07 View instructions on how to participate.=20
=0F=07 Email questions before or during an event.=20
=0F=07 Download RealPlayer 8 or Windows Media Player.=20
Check out other Schwab online events:=20
http://schwab.ed10.net/ud/AY7Q/XT4U/V12M/JY/42KGY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Options carry a high level of risk and are not suitable for all=20
investors. Certain requirements must be met to trade options=20
through Schwab. Please read the options disclosure document=20
titled "Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options"=20
before considering any option transaction. Call your local=20
Schwab office or write to Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. at 101=20
Montgomery Street, San Francisco, CA 94104 for a current copy.
To change your email address, log on here:
http://schwab.ed10.net/ud/AY7Q/ZBKH/V12M/ZH/42KGY
You will be taken to the page that will allow you to update your=20
email address securely. For your protection, we are unable to=20
accept instructions to change your email address sent in reply to=20
this message.=20
To unsubscribe from the Signature Events emails, log on below, go=20
to the bottom of the page, click on Unsubscribe, then click on=20
Finish.=20
http://schwab.ed10.net/ud/AY7Q/EW1W/V12M/E4/42KGY
We respect your privacy. Schwab will use the information you=20
provide to open and service your accounts, communicate with you=20
and provide information about products and services. Read about=20
Schwab's privacy policy:
http://schwab.ed10.net/ud/AY7Q/9ZF7/V12M/9A/42KGY
Notice: All email sent to or from the Charles Schwab corporate=20
email system may be retained, monitored and/or reviewed by=20
Schwab personnel.=20
,2001 Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. All rights reserved. Member=20
SIPC/NYSE. (0401-15460)=20
[IMAGE]
=====================================
|
3,651 |
Subject: Fwd: approval of FERC article for eBiz
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2944.
=====================================
Steve asked me to forward this to you.
(Did I get anything right????!!!!)
Jeannie
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (rly-yg03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.3]) by
air-yg04.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.23) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Nov 2000 18:15:55 -0500
Received: from postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by
rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Nov 2000 18:15:21 -0400
Received: from nahou-msmsw01px.corp.enron.com ([172.28.10.37]) by
postmaster.enron.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/postmaster-1.00) with ESMTP id SAA10219 for
<[email protected]>; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 18:15:20 -0500 (CDT)
From: [email protected]
Received: from ene-mta01.enron.com (unverified) by
nahou-msmsw01px.corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP
id <[email protected]> for
<[email protected]>; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 17:15:19 -0600
Subject: Re: approval of FERC article for eBiz
To: [email protected]
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.3 March 21, 2000
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 17:15:14 -0600
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ENE-MTA01/Enron(Release 5.0.3 (Intl)|21
March 2000) at 11/01/2000 05:11:17 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
Boundary="0__=8625698A007F17168f9e8a93df938690918c8625698A007F1716"
Content-Disposition: inline
I think it looks good. a few suggestions though:
I haven't read the whole reprt so I can't say for sure that it alleges no
price gouging (make sure to forward this to Jeff ... my e-mail is slow on
the road). We can say though, that instead of blaming generators and
marketers the report blames the structure of the market for California's
woes.
I think we should shorten the quote to something like " the reprt is
consistent with what we have said all along.
We should say that the scheduling penalties part of the order will
"penalize utilities for underscheduling" not predicting.
Hedging is not about holding pirces down so much as it is about protecting
people from wild price swings ... that's what allowing utilities to buy
outside the spot should help do.
(Also, my title is just EVP and Chief of Staff)
JMandelker@ao
l.com To: [email protected],
[email protected]
cc:
11/01/2000 Subject: approval of FERC
article for eBiz
03:32 PM
Thanks for talking to me about this article for this Friday's eBiz.
Please read it over and let me have comments tomorrow morning (Thursday).
it
goes live 5 p.m. Thursday evening.
Sorry for AOL -- my Notes is wreaking havoc today.
(Jeff -- Steve confirmed that the report said power sellers did not
exercise
market power or price gouging, so I put it in the article.)
Take care,
Jeannie
(See attached file: FERC Report.doc)
- FERC Report.doc
=====================================
|
3,652 |
Subject: Great News! Student tickets extension for SF Symphony
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2524.
=====================================
Hi all:
I am glad to announce that due to the great sales results, the
deadline for student tickets to SF Symphony concerts is extended to
10/28/00! So if you missed the previous date, you have more than a week to
sign up! Please see the end of this email for details.
I'll now she my "wolf-skin" as a marketer, and share a few personal
notes here re classical music:
-Why classical, when early Beatles is quite cool to my ears?
* Lovely sounds. Such as the strings in a well-played "Four Seasons",
or the spacious trumpet sound in John Williams.
* Emotional appeal. You find expressions of emotion that are simply
impossible in words.
* Beauty of composition. A good score is like a maze of accoustic
wonders.
* You already like it. Many of us don't realize how common our
encounter with classical music is. Do you know the title music in Kubrik's
"2000: Space Odyssey" is from Wagner? Or Hitchcock's music score inspired by
Stravinsky?
* Enjoy pop music more. For example, Pink Floyd.
-Why concerts, when CDs are readily available?
* The sound wth its full depth, and the atmosphere. For those of you
who are not familiar with orchestral music, a concert, where you can relate
the sound to the sight of various instruments working, is the best learning
opportunity. A sense of magic comes from this aural-visual relation. I
myself got hooked to it by reluctantly going to my first LA Philharmonic
concerts when I was in grad school.
-I am still not convinced. Give me one good reason, really...
* Well, even if you hate the concert, the very experience gives you
the "hands-on" confidence to say, "Classical music is bonk"!
Now, details:
Subscribe to the San Francisco Symphony's 2000-2001 season and save up to
60% off full-price tickets!
Subscribing to the San Francisco Symphony as a student means that you
purchase a package of six concerts for half the price. (Subscribe to a 12-
or 24-concert package, and save nearly 60%.) Symphony subscriptions start at
only $14 per concert, and you can purchase two subscriptions with one
student ID.
This year's highlights include:
Mahler's Symphony of a Thousand
Dvorak's Cello Concerto
Ravel's Bolero
MTT's world-renowned interpretations of Stravinsky and Copland
Soloists include:
Violinists Itzhak Perlman and Sarah Chang
Pianists Lang Lang and Andras Schiff
Percussionist Evelyn Glennie
Hayes Valley, the neighborhood surrounding Davies Symphony Hall, is full of
restaurants and bars in every price range to make your evening complete.
BART and MUNI both stop only a few blocks away (and the concerts end by
10pm), so taking public transportation is easy.
Many San Francisco Symphony concerts were sold out last season, but student
subscribers already had these hard-to-get tickets in hand, and they paid
just half-price. To order your tickets or to receive a free brochure, call
Symphony Ticket Services at (415) 864-6000, or visit us online at
sfsymphony.org for information.
Deadline to order: October 28.
=====================================
|
3,653 |
Subject: accusations get nasty
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3078.
=====================================
see article below
----- Forwarded by Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications on
05/22/01 10:59 AM -----
[email protected]
05/22/01 06:04 AM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: accusations get nasty
excerpt from an article
Joe W. Kolb
Environmental Manager, Enron Corp
713/646-6180 713/345-6164 fax
3AC 1517
----- Forwarded by Joe Kolb/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 05/22/2001 08:00 AM -----
Bill
Osborne/ENRON@ To: John
Steenberg/ENRON@enronXgate, Ted Ryther/ENRON@enronXgate,
enronXgate William Kendrick/ENRON@enronXgate,
Joe
Kolb/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
05/22/2001
cc:
07:54 AM Subject: now that's not
nice!
from:
California Blame Game Yields No Score
---
Probes Reveal Little Evidence Suppliers Acted Illegally
By John R. Emshwiller
05/22/2001
The Wall Street Journal
While the energy suppliers are generating "unconscionable profits," the
question remains "whether they are illegal profits," says California
Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who has offered rewards of as much as
hundreds of millions of dollars for information about lawbreaking in the
energy business.
Mr. Lockyer says he believes his office will eventually file civil charges
against suppliers. He would very much like to add criminal counts. "I would
love to personally escort [Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth] Lay to an 8 x 10
cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says `Hi my name is
Spike, honey,'" adds Mr. Lockyer. Houston-based Enron is a major
energy-trading company. Like other such firms, Enron has denied wrongdoing
in the California market.
Mark Palmer, Enron's vice president for corporate communications, said Mr.
Lockyer's comment about Mr. Lay "is so counterproductive that it doesn't
merit a response."
[email protected]
Enron Transportation Services
713/646-7889 713/646-7867 fax
3AC 3141
=====================================
|
3,654 |
Subject: US Dam Rescues Calif Grid, But Lawmaker Demands More Pwr
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', "nicholas.o'[email protected]", '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/614.
=====================================
US Dam Rescues Calif Grid, But Lawmaker Demands More Pwr
09/25/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- California averted a blackout last week with some
help from the federal government.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation opened the flowgates at the massive Glen
Canyon dam in Arizona, providing 300 megawatts of power for four hours in the
afternoon of Sept. 18, according to federal officials.
The event illustrated how dependent the Western power grid is on electricity
from U.S. government-owned dams, and highlighted the increasing political
tensions that arise from the use of these assets as competition shakes up the
nation's $215 billion power sector.
At a House Government Reform Committee hearing last Thursday, Rep. Doug Ose,
R-Calif., demanded to know why, if the Bureau of Reclamation was able to help
the state avert a grid emergency, it didn't make electricity available
throughout the summer months when San Diego consumers paid twice as much for
electricity as they did in 1999.
"This administration sacrificed the interests of consumers in San Diego," Ose
declared.
But a Bureau of Reclamation spokesman said last week's emergency marked the
first time the California grid operator had asked for help.
The Interior Department agency was prepared to act further by making power
available from other dams later in the week, but the state's grid operator
didn't ask for power, said the spokesman, Barry Worth.
Under a mandate from the Interior Department to restore riverbank beaches
deemed critical for endangered wildlife, Glen Canyon has been operated for
the last few years in a way that reduces net power production from the dam by
about 900 megawatts.
The doubling of flows last Monday was within the restricted range required by
the Interior Department, Worth said.
But he noted the agency was reluctant to do so out of concern it would
interfere with a summer-long test of the impact on endangered species from
drought-simulated low flows.
"The amount we increased was of concern to us initially because of our test,
but we determined the amount was analogous to monsoonal thunderstorms we
would normally get this time of year," Worth said.
"We wanted to make sure we were protecting our studies," he said.
Nevertheless, Worth noted that power from Glen Canyon doesn't normally flow
to California to begin with. And he emphasized that transmission constraints
don't make the state a natural destination for the dam's power.
Given the configuration of the Western grid, it is easier for California to
get its power from other sources in the region, such as Hoover Dam, Worth
said.
"We responded, but there's a limitation to how much we can (help) to begin
with," he said.
Still, if California asks, the agency is prepared to help by providing power
again, Worth said.
By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6647, [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,655 |
Subject: Reminder: Martha Amram Real Options talk tomorrow Tuesday
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11403.
=====================================
Haas Biotech Club, Haas Finance Club and
The Lester Center for Entrepreneurship
are very proud to present
Martha Amram?
"What's Real About Real Options"
Tuesday April 24th 2001
6:30 PM
Wells Fargo Room
Haas School of Business
UC Berkeley
Refreshments will be served
?
------------------------------------------------------------------ About the
talk By Jacob Sagi, Assistant Professor of Finance, Haas School of Business
Martha Amram is one of the leading advocates of the real options approach to
asset valuation. The methodology originated as an economically sound way to
calculate the value of an asset whose management requires sequential
decision-making. For instance, a pharmaceutical company may wish to assess
the value of a speculative research project that, after many stages, may
result in a marketable drug. At each stage the company can decide to proceed
along a number of routes: abandoning the project, moth balling it, or
continuing on a variety of scales. Roughly speaking, the real options
approach selects, from among a universe of possible sequential decision
strategies, a single strategy that maximizes the present value of cash
flows. The cash flows for each strategy are discounted for the risk that the
strategy reflects and not by an ad hoc cost of capital discount factor.
A real options approach to valuation is especially useful when one is trying
to decide whether to defer investment in a project (analogous to deciding
whether an American Call option should be exercised), or when an asset
embodies latent value due to future growth possibilities (e.g., internet
firms). Although academicians have long been proponents of the technique,
there is still a great deal of skepticism among practitioners. This is
largely due to the fact that "optimal" decisions reached via a real options
approach are sensitive to input variables that are not always known reliably
(e.g., the probability that a drug will be deemed successful in human
trials). Regardless, a growing number of firms are opting for the
methodology. This is evidenced by an increase in the number of consulting
firms who employ or specialize in real options analyses.
Tuesday's speaker, Martha Amram, is the author of an important book on the
subject, "Real Options: Managing Strategic Investments in an Uncertain
World," as well as recent articles in the Journal of Business Strategy,
Harvard Business Review and Journal of Applied Corporate Finance. She has
extensive consulting experience and is frequently invited to speak on the
subject of real options. Although some in the business community have
recently branded real options valuations a fad, academicians, like myself,
would contend that the methodology is an important tool that is here to
stay. I therefore encourage all students to come to the talk and learn more
about the advantages and disadvantages of this much-talked-about concept.
?
=====================================
|
3,656 |
Subject: Re: NARUC commissioners BIC meeting
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9557.
=====================================
Thanks very much for the update. Scheduling a session at the NARUC summer
meetings sounds like a good idea. Are there next steps you think we should
take to encourage this?
Susan M Landwehr
02/28/2001 10:27 PM
To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected]
cc: Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephen D
Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Margo
Reyna/NA/Enron@Enron, John Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Lara
Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Carmen
Perez/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Kathy Huang/AA/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: NARUC commissioners BIC meeting
Sue/Scott--as you know, Broadband Infastructure Coalition (BIC) met over
breakfast this morning in D.C. with Commisioner Joan Smith of Oregon and Alan
Thoms of Iowa, the chair and vice chair of the telecom committee. Jim Prybil
of Level 3, Rick Wood of WIlliams, Michael Freedman of Global Crossing and I
were there on behalf of the coaliton. The primary message that we delivered
was that there should not be any expansion of extortion by local
municiapalities for right of way access (that "just and reasonable costs"
were being interpreted very liberally by the league of cities and other folks
and that the true interpretation should be actual incurred costs) and that we
hoped NARUC and these commissioners could support our position and promote
positions that enhance our ability to expand infastructure without unfair
fees or costs.
Both Commissioners were sympathetic and supportive, but Ms. Smith in
particular indicated that the issue is generally outside of the their purview
and that the political realities of strongly wading into the issue would be
difficult for some COmmissioners on the committee (the city/muni/local
political clout either with the Administration that appoints the
commissioners or the electorate if commisioners are elected). However, they
both suggested that the NARUC committee should consider having a session on
the issue, possibly at the summer NARUC meeting. I spoke with Alan Thoms as
he left the breakfast, and he indicated that he thought a full day of
sessions covering this issue, poles and wires, as well as building access
would be very productive. I expressed to him our interest in the building
access issue as well.
Rick Wood of Williams is going to take responsibility with the BIC for
interaction with this NARUC committee. (I believe that Rick came from a
regulatory background at GTE).
I did not attend any of the NARUC telecom meetings, but I believe that Alison
was going to cover and will send out an update if there was anything of note
to report.
Paul--I copied you as a courtesy just so you knew that someone from Enron was
in front of one of your Oregon commissioners.
=====================================
|
3,657 |
Subject: FW: Additional FERC Actions Likely On MONDAY
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', 'Tom; Shelk', 'Ban; Briggs', 'James; Sharma', 'Steffes', 'John']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12618.
=====================================
Here's what I heard on the D.C. call today re: the Senator Lieberman
hearings:
June 13--6 witnesses consisting of: (1) 4 of the 6, pro-price cap
economists; and (2) 2 anti-price cap economists.
June 20--FERC Commissioners and Gov. Davis.
-----Original Message-----
From: Comnes, Alan
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 1:33 PM
To: Alonso, Tom; Alvarez, Ray; Badeer, Robert; Belden, Tim; Calger,
Christopher F.; Dasovich, Jeff; Driscoll, Michael M.; Fischer, Mark; Foster,
Chris H.; Guzman, Mark; Heizenrader, Timothy; Kaufman, Paul; Mainzer, Elliot;
Mallory, Chris; Mara, Susan; Motley, Matt; Perrino, Dave; Platter, Phillip;
Richter, Jeff; Scholtes, Diana; Swain, Steve; Swerzbin, Mike; Williams III,
Bill; Wolfe, Greg
Cc: Steffes, James; Sharma, Ban; Briggs, Tom; Shelk, John
Subject: Additional FERC Actions Likely On MONDAY
Importance: High
FERC has set a meeting for Monday18 June 10 am PDT wherein it has noticed its
California and WSCC-wide dockets. The meeting has been timed in advance of
congressional hearings (by Senator Joseph Lieberman) that were set for later
in the week.
Expect FERC to respond to intense political pressure to expand its current
price mitigation measures, possibly to a WSCC-wide scope or to all hours, or
both.
As far as I know Hebert is still President of the FERC, which would speak to
less intervention rather than more.
We will forward information as we learn it.
Alan Comnes
US FERC To Meet June 18 On Western US Electricity Prices
06/11/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has
scheduled a special meeting June 18 to address pending matters involving
electricity markets in California and neighboring Western states.
The commission's meeting notice provides no details, except to list for
discussion four cases involving price mitigation in, and the structure of,
volatile power markets in California and 10 other Western states.
The meeting comes as members of Congress are placing enormous political
pressure on the commission to take more drastic action to contain runaway
electricity prices in the region.
Last week, House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., joined 21
Western-state congressional lawmakers to request an opportunity to appear
before the commission to argue their case for cost-based price controls in
the region's electricity markets.
"At least twice, FERC has determined that the Western electricity market is
'dysfunctional' and that prices are 'unjust and unreasonable' under the
Federal Power Act. Despite these findings, and contrary to the law, the
commission has failed to bring these rates to just and reasonable levels,"
the lawmakers said in a letter to FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.
By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6647, [email protected]
Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
=====================================
|
3,658 |
Subject: Offer for VentureWire Subscribers
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3477.
=====================================
Dear Jeffrey,
One of VentureWire's missions is to provide our subscriber
base with valuable opportunities to find out more about the
people and companies driving the private equity markets. As
such, we have arranged a special offer for you to attend
Enterprise Outlook on June 26 and 27 at the San Francisco
Airport Marriott. Enterprise Outlook will examine the best
technologies for collaboration, business-process management,
application integration, supply-chain software, and other
business-critical areas. And as a VentureWire subscriber you
will SAVE an additional $100 of the registration price. If you
register early by May 11 your savings will be a total of $400
off the full price. Learn more at:
http://www.enterpriseoutlook.com/vw.asp
Management Presentations:
From licensed software to Web-based services, a new crop of
startups have geared up to provide the underlying technology
needed to cross the corporate boundaries and firewalls that
divide manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and customers.
Privately held presenting companies include:
Asera - provides software and services for creating Web-
based applications
Datasweep - supplies software that helps contract
manufacturers and their customers view and adjust activities
on the factory floor
iMediation - helps Global 2000 companies reach out to their
channel partners
Check out the complete line up of up to 100 presenting
companies by going to:
http://www.enterpriseoutlook.com/vw.asp
Speakers:
The industry strives for the utopian enterprise vision of
streamlined connection within and among companies for the
direct exchange of data and transactions between people,
applications, machines, and businesses. At Enterprise
Outlook, top executives will discuss how the industry moves
in that direction:
Dan'l Lewin, VP, NET Business Development, Microsoft
Dale Skeen, Chief Technology Officer, Vitria Technology
Ivan Koon, President E-Commerce Integration, BEA Systems
Gregory Owens, Chairman & CEO, Manugistics
For a complete speaker agenda, check out:
http://www.enterpriseoutlook.com/vw.asp
The 5th Annual Enterprise Outlook at the San Francisco
Airport Marriot on June 26 and 27 promises to be one of the
most exciting conferences of the year. So remember, don't
miss early registration by May 11 and your chance to SAVE
up to $400 just for being a VentureWire subscriber.
Register online at: http://www.enterpriseoutlook.com/vw.asp
Thank you,
Brian O'Connell, Publisher, VentureWire
[email protected]
http://www.enterpriseoutlook.com/vw.asp
P.S. If you think Enterprise Outlook would be a good
opportunity for your company to gain additional exposure,
then contact Michael Dodd at 212-343-1900, ext. 118, or
[email protected] to inquire about sponsorship
availabilities.
P.P.S. If you'd prefer not to receive such messages from
us, follow this link:
http://www.venturewire.com/[email protected]
and we'll make sure you don't in the future.
=====================================
|
3,659 |
Subject: FW: Diesel generator info.
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/2108.
=====================================
FYI. Martin may be interested.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Bruce [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 4:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Diesel generator info.
Hello Environmental and Energy Committee Members:
Please see the following request from Dr. Kenneth Lim of the BAAQMD. The
information he seeks is in support of a petition for additional State
funding for BAAQMD programs. I understand how short the notice is, but if
you can provide Dr. Lim some information, I think he and the BAAQMD would be
very appreciative. If you would like to send me your data, I will forward
it to Ken Lim without your company information.
Sincerely,
Margaret Bruce
Director, Environmental Programs
Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 1:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Diesel generator info.
Ms. Margaret Bruce:
SVMG
Hi Margaret:
I had sent this message to Justin Bradley last week, but have not
heard back from him. I should have sent it to you also.
I hope that things are going well with you.
I'm trying to assess the emissions impact of increased Back-Up
Generator (BUG) diesel fuel use from 2000 to 2001. I need real data
to support an effort to get state funds to help mitigate the
additional emissions in the Bay Area. This is NOT for compliance,
enforcement, or rulemaking, etc. purposes. I could use your help.
I would need 2000 and 2001 data for diesel fuel use or hours of BUG
operation:
BUG engine, hp, fuel use 2000 and 2001 to date. One comparison might
be 10/1/99-9/30/00 fuel use versus 10/1/00-9/30/01 use.
We want to verify, if it is true, that business and industry felt
compelled by the energy situation to operate their diesel BUGs more
hours and burn more fuel (fuel readiness testing and emergency backup
power) than in past comparable periods.
I was hoping that you could provide some actual use data for the
back-up diesel engines at your SVMG member companies. I would need
specific engine information as indicated above. The data information
can be as simple as total diesel fuel use for the first 9 months of
2000 versus the first 9 mos. of 2001. Ideally, we would prefer
10/1/99-9/30/00 fuel use versus 10/1/00-9/30/01 use.
I'm seeking this information at your earliest convenience (by the end
of the day Wednesday). Please telephone or e-mail me if you have any
questions. My apologies for this short notice (I did send in an
inquiry to Justin on 10/22/01). Thanks very much for your
consideration.
Ken
Kenneth Lim, Ph.D.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
939 Ellis Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
Phone: 415-749-4710
FAX: 415-749-5030
E-MAIL: [email protected]
=====================================
|
3,660 |
Subject: Wall Street Journal Asking for Our Data
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/826.
=====================================
FYI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 08/29/2000 10:27
AM ---------------------------
Gary Ackerman <[email protected]> on 08/24/2000 06:49:26 PM
Please respond to [email protected]
To: Bill Ross <[email protected]>, Bob Anderson <[email protected]>,
Carolyn Baker <[email protected]>, Corby Gardin
<[email protected]>, Curtis Kebler
<[email protected]>, Denice Cazalet <[email protected]>, Gene
Waas <[email protected]>, Greg Blue <[email protected]>, Jack Pigott
<[email protected]>, Ken Czarnecki <[email protected]>, Kent
Wheatland <[email protected]>, "Klemstine, Barbara A(F56661)"
<[email protected]>, Randy Hickok <[email protected]>, Rob
Lamkin <[email protected]>, Rob Nichol <[email protected]>,
robert berry <[email protected]>, Roger Pelote <[email protected]>, Sue Mara
<[email protected]>, curt hatton <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich
<[email protected]>, Dan Douglass <[email protected]>, Tim Belden
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Wall Street Journal Asking for Our Data
URGENT REPLY AND ACTION NEEDED
Folks,
Rebecca Smith of the Wall Street Journal called me today and asked how
she could access the bid data the ISO has for the generators in order to
do an investigative in-depth analysis of what has occurred in
California's wholesale power market. Before I get into the details of
her request, I would urge you in the strongest way possible to consider
her request, and grant it. We need the light of truth to shine on our
business, and the Wall Street Journal may be one of our best aids. And
consider this, the data will be available to her in six months, anyway.
Rebecca's intent is to study the data, and understand the true behavior
of the wholesale market for a given month. She said July 2000 would
work. Her hypothesis is unlikely that the hype by Gov Davis and the
State of accusing in-state and out-of-state generators of being gougers
and the guitly parties , and can be deminished by the data. She thinks
there are plenty of people in the generation market who are playing this
straight as an arrow. Without the data, she can't say anything
conclusive. (of course, I wonder how she will gather the UDC bid data?)
I have one question. Did the ISO give the detailed bid data to the EOB
or the PUC? I thought because neither the EOB nor the ISO would or
could keep the data confidential, the detailed bid data was not
released, only the aggregate data.
I asked her if she would keep the data confidential, in other words, not
pass it on to other parties. She said she could. I asked her if other
assocaites of the Wall Street Journal would have access to the data.
She said probably in order to do an in depth analysis others would have
access on a need to know basis, but that the data would not leave the
Wall Street Journal's control.
Tell me what we should do, and tell me quickly.
gba
=====================================
|
3,661 |
Subject: Questions - round 1
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4194.
=====================================
fyi
----- Forwarded by Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron on 04/17/2001 09:15 PM -----
Harry Kingerski
04/17/2001 09:13 PM
To: Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, (bcc:
Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron)
Subject: Questions - round 1
Can we discuss some of this on the morning call ...
1. Proposal is critically dependent on a forecast of market price. It is
asserted that the current market price is $300. This is based on a weighted
average of NYMEX futures for COB for on-peak and historical NP-15 off-peak
for Jan - Mar, extrapolated to the rest of the year.
Questions: COB prices are much closer to NP-15 than they are to SP-15 (which
are much lower, at least some of the time). In the real time price, we
average NP and SP 15. Why don't we average in something representative of
SP-15 when we calculate market price?
The effect of not doing this is to overestimate market price, and therefore
raise the threshold (87%) above where it should be. For example, if the
market price were estimated at $200, the real time price would apply starting
at 78%. Would we be agreeable to averaging in the NYMEX Palo Verde price as
a proxy for SP-15?
Better yet, would we say the market price for PG&E and SCE would be
separately calculated based on different weights for those two indices?
Do you see any value in doing the calculation separately for on and off peak
rather than averaging them together (I was already asked this at the
workshop)?
2. The formula for revenue sufficiency produces the perverse result that, as
market price goes up, the 87% threshold also goes up. In other words, if
market price were $1000, then the threshold is calculated at 97%. The entire
revenue requirement is then recovered over the last 3% of usage, and is very
vulnerable to elasticity.
Questions: Can we avoid this problem by simply saying, 87% is a reasonable
number to start with, we don't recommend changing this based on changing
market prices, and if market prices change radically in the future, we would
expect DWR to come up with a new revenue requirement and and so the $30
target would change? (This equates to saying the $30 is right on target with
DWR's current needs.)
Stated another way, there is no change to our mechanism for changing market
prices until or unless DWR comes in with another revenue requirement that
justifies moving form the $30 target. In the meantime, our method is
somewhat self-correcting in that the last 13% is subject to a floating
price. ok?
3. The utility cost in the formula is $65.
Questions: This would be specific to each utility, correct? In other words,
each utility would have its own market price (see #1) and embedded cost? The
$65 includes QFs, right; in other words, it's for everything other than the
net short?
Tamara and Scott - thanks for all the material you've been sending my way.
Helps very much.
=====================================
|
3,662 |
Subject: Re: URGENT - ACTION REQUIRED - INTERACTIONS WITH UTILITIES
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1602.
=====================================
Nancy, thank you for taking care of this.
FYI to the rest of the group. CSC had been engaging in some discussions
with PG&E and SCE over when they expected the rate freeze would end. The
interest from CSC's perspective was to be ready for billing changes. I
received a call from Julie Logsdon (CSC) wanting to know Enron's view.
Nancy also was receiving calls from CSC people to find out Enron's view on
roll-off.
Nancy and I discussed the concern about CSC knowing anything about Enron's
view of roll-off, especially if they were making call to the utilities. As
a result, we determined that GA would alert Nancy on any imminent rate
changes as a result of the rate freeze ending so that she can alert CSC.
Otherwise, there should be no direct communication to CSC on Enron's view
or between CSC and the utilities on this matter, especially on Enron's
behalf.
(Embedded
image moved
to file: From: Nancy Hetrick
pic19589.pcx) 11/10/2000 08:19 AM
To: Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: URGENT - ACTION REQUIRED - INTERACTIONS WITH UTILITIES
Well hopefully this will take care of the concerns that we had with CSC and
the utilities. Please let me know if you have any questions. Have a great
weekend.
---------------------- Forwarded by Nancy Hetrick/NA/Enron on 11/10/2000
08:18 AM ---------------------------
[email protected] on 11/09/2000 06:56:27 PM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: URGENT - ACTION REQUIRED - INTERACTIONS WITH UTILITIES
Please ensure this message is disseminated to your staff.
Diann and Nancy Hetrick has request us to immediately stop making contact
with UDC ESP Reps (for example Calvin Yee, Laura Clay). Their
requirement for us ongoing is that we are to go through either Diann or
Nancy if a discussion is needed with one of the UDC ESP reps. Some
specific examples were sited of our people contacting PG&E regarding CTC
roll-off .
It is OK for CSC to contact our UDC billing, metering, EDI, etc. contacts
to handle day to day work issues and this contact should continue.
However, Enron wants to address escalations or future state (e.g. CTC
roll-off) issues directly with the UDC ESP reps.
Also - we need to remind everyone that we need to ensure that when we
participate in public meetings (utility, industry, etc.) that we are
careful in our choice of words to ensure that those listening understand
that we are speaking for CSC and not for Enron.
There are some very serious discussions underway between Enron and one of
the UDCs. There is a concern that casual comments even though intended
to be innocent could create problems. In order to control the
discussions, they are requiring our cooperation.
Please call if questions.
Thanks,
Teresa
- pic19589.pcx
=====================================
|
3,663 |
Subject: RE: November Direct Report Meeting Changes
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/618.
=====================================
Sounds like a plan.
-----Original Message-----
From: Montovano, Steve
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 11:12 AM
To: Steffes, James D.; Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: November Direct Report Meeting Changes
I would suggest that we get a handle on the weather prior to committing. If you remember it wasn't the warmest round of golf I've ever played. That said however, I'm in if you guys are in!
-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James D.
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 5:56 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Montovano, Steve
Subject: RE: November Direct Report Meeting Changes
I'll play the cheap course.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 4:55 PM
To: Steffes, James D.; Kingerski, Harry; Montovano, Steve
Subject: RE: November Direct Report Meeting Changes
I'm still in for golf if you are. I'll bring some knitting in case you decide to bail...
-----Original Message-----
From: Dernehl, Ginger
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 4:39 PM
To: Steffes, James D.; Yoho, Lisa; Nord, Sue; Migden, Janine; Montovano, Steve; Hemstock, Robert; Kaufman, Paul; Ryall, Jean; Kingerski, Harry; Ibrahim, Amr; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Novosel, Sarah; Linnell, Elizabeth; Petrochko, Mona L.
Cc: Dernehl, Ginger; Shapiro, Richard; Noske, Linda J.; Warner, Geriann; Sullivan, Lora; Knight, Laurie; Bellas, Kirsten; Sietzema, Linda; Hunter, Bevin; Buerger, Rubena; Stransky, Joan; Alamo, Joseph; Hawkins, Bernadette; Perez, Carmen
Subject: November Direct Report Meeting Changes
There are several changes to the Direct Report meeting in November.
First, the meeting will now conclude by 12:00 (noon) on Friday, November 9.
Second, the activities portion of the trip will not be sponsored by Enron....each individual will be responsible (personally) for payment of activity of choice. Most individuals either chose golf or horseback riding.....below is an estimate as to how much these activities will cost.
Golf:
Green Fees (East/West Course) $155.00/18 holes (Includes golf cart, use of practice balls, club care & storage)
(East/West Course) $85.00/9 holes (includes - same as above)
(Mountain Course) $95.00/18 holes (includes - same as above)
(Mountain Course) $50.00/9 holes (includes - same as above)
Rentals:
Golf clubs with sleeve of balls $55.00
Golf Shoes $20.00
Horseback riding: 1hour $25.00/person
1hour pkg $35.00/person (pkg includes shuttle ride to stables)
2hour $40.00/person
2hour pkg $50.00/person (pkg includes shuttle ride to stables)
mini ride (group only) $15.00/approximately 20 minutes
If you have an interest in the spa services that are available, please let me know and I will fax the spa list to you.
Please let me know ASAP which activity you choose so I can make the necessary arrangements.
Thanks and please call me if you have any questions.
Ginger Dernehl
Administrative Coordinator
Global Government Affairs
Phone# 713-853-7751
Fax# 713-646-8160
=====================================
|
3,664 |
Subject: CALIFORNIA -- WHAT MAY HAPPEN NEXT-- REFUNDS STILL BEING DISCUSSED
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2988.
=====================================
GREETINGS:
So, we're all happy that FERC finally made a decision. Traders tell me the
market has stabilized and people think much of the regulatory uncertainty has
ended. NOT SO FAST..... I am NOT an attorney -- but here are my current
guesses.
ISSUE: FERC has created a huge constitutional issue with the state of CA.
The FERC has ordered the ISO to do something differently than what was
specified in the state legislation, AB 1890. The last time this happened, in
late 1999 (on ISO and PX governance), the state reared its back -- and FERC
caved in. So let's not be sanguine about what FERC has done here. Much will
need to be done by Enron and others to bolster FERC.
THE COURTS: The state could get its back up and decide to fight this. The
potential is that FERC will get political pressure to "settle", once a
request for rehearing is submitted. Remember --- this is ALL political.
It's not about logic. Last time, the state, through the Oversight Board,
submitted a request for rehearing with FERC. FERC told them to pound sand,
so the EOB then filed in federal court to overturn the order. This was
"settled" when the state negotiated with FERC behind the scenes and FERC did
a 180. (We have a court case pending on that order.) If the state decides to
go the rehearing route, I'm not too sure when they could initiate court
action. They could probably file for an emergency stay, but they tried that
in the last court case and it was rejected.
GOVERNOR: A little has been trickling out. Gov. Davis went to town at a
press conference yesterday, talking about gouging generators and sending $6
billion out of state. He stated his unhappiness with the FERC not providing
refunds. He says his adminstration will continue its fight to have refunds
ordered. His administration will "participate fully" in the FERC hearing on
Nov 9. The Governor believes that the state lost control of its transmission
system when it passed 1890. So, I could conceive of some legislation or a
federal push to "give it back." I don't think that would be ultimately
successful, but it would likely create some wild times.
FEDERAL: The press reported that U.S. Sen Feinstein will introduce a measure
in the next few days to give FERC retroactive refund authority.
STATE LEGISLATURE: State Sen Bowen has said she plans to hold a hearing
in mid-month and will draft a "legislative response to the FERC proposal."
Assemblyman Rod Wright met with about 30 people today (suppliers and
utilities) to explore some issues. He wants to take leadership of the issue
and is supported by the Speaker of the House. He plans legislative action.
CONSUMER ADVOCATES: Press reports state that several consumer organizations
are considering court action to get the refunds.
TIMING: Soon and sooner. Hearings can happen any time. The legislature
returns in January and we can expect emergency legislation and a quick pace.
Hold on to your hats!
=====================================
|
3,665 |
Subject: Re: Tutorial topics
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8050.
=====================================
Looks like we'll be needing dinner and sleeping bags, along with breakfast
and lunch.
Lara Leibman@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
01/02/2001 01:59 PM
To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Bolton/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Donald Lassere/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Xi Xi/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M
Landwehr/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robbi Rossi/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Kristina Mordaunt/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Margo Reyna/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Tutorial topics
For anyone interested in attending the all-day spectrum seminar on Monday,
January 8th on the 47th floor, below please find a list of topics that
Bennett Kobb intends to cover. Also, if you have not already RSVP'd, please
do so in order that I may have an accurate count for the breakfast and
lunch. Thanks very much.
Regards,
Lara
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/Enron Communications on 01/02/01 02:01 PM
-----
[email protected]
12/27/00 09:57 AM
To: Lara Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: Tutorial topics
Lara,
Here are some of the topics to cover with you.
This is an informal list; if there are items you want to add or
subtract, let's do so by all means.
I would like to have a computer handy with SpectrumGuide loaded onto
it. I normally use a blackboard or whiteboard.
Benn Kobb
Spectrum Tutorial
1. Background of Regulatory Agencies
FCC history
NTIA history
ITU history
Tables of Allocations
Communications Act and Congress' role
Charges to the FCC
PICON
Agency Organizational Units
Policies and Pronouncements vs. Rules
Regulatory Process Steps
Internal Initiative
External Initiative
Public Comment Process
Negotiated Rulemakings
En Banc Hearings
Lobbying FCC and Congress
Ex Parte Process
2. Radio Services
FCC's Classification Role
Public Service Examples
Private Service Examples
Broadcast Services
Allocation, Allotment, Assignment
Successful and Unsuccessful Services
Transformation of Services
Experimental Services
Stakeholder System:
Associations
Standards Bodies
Governments
Manufacturers
Users
3. Technology
Origins of Modern Services
Basic Technical Standards
Interference and Coordination
Technopolitical Conflicts/Resolutions
Equipment Authorization
Unlicensed Devices
Services Licensed by Rule
Analog to Digital Transition
Siting Issues
Unused and Underused Spectrum
4. Current Issues
Auctions as a Licensee Selection Mechanism
Auctions as a Rights Conveyance Mechanism
Band Management
Relocation and Rights of Incumbents
Partitioning and Disaggregation
Secondary Markets
Control of a Station
Site Licensing vs. Geographic Areas
Alternatives to Auction System
=====================================
|
3,666 |
Subject: US FERC-Ordered Calif Power Talks End Without Agreement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28467.
=====================================
I am told that due to the lack of settlement the Judge will recommend a
refund based on a proxy MCP wherein there will be a daily or hourly heat rate
multiplied by a DAILY gas price + O&M. Emission costs would be justfied on a
generator-specific basis.
The refund would only look at transactions 2 Oct. 00 - 19 June 01. Note that
refund orders have already come out so presumably this recommendation would
lead to a modification of those existing orders.
The modifications proposed to the June 19 order affect the refund caculation
only; this does not change anything to the current mitigation rules.
To reiterate: the judges recommendation is just that and FERC has not yet
ruled fromally.
More news to come.
Alan Comnes
US FERC-Ordered Calif Power Talks End Without Agreement
07/09/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Federally mediated negotiations between the state of
California and power providers ended Monday without an agreement settling the
state's demand for refunds for alleged overcharges.
Throughout the fast track 15-day settlement conference California remained
steadfast in its demand for $8.9 billion in refunds. But power providers
offered a total of $716.1 million, according to the federal mediator
overseeing the talks.
U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chief Administrative Law Judge
Curtis Wagner said at the close of talks Monday that he will recommend that
the commission use its June 19 price-mitigation order to retroactively
determine refunds due dating back to Oct. 2, 2000. Such an approach is
expected to result in a total refund far less than the nearly $9 billion
sought by the state.
The FERC ordered settlement conference "set the balls rolling," Wagner said.
"In 15 days you can't work miracles," he said of the unresolved negotiations.
Wagner said he would recommend that FERC order a fast-track hearing of 60
days or less to address the disputed issues unresolved by the talks. He also
said he would recommend alterations in the June 19 orders pricing methodology
to address "problems" involving power plant heat rates, natural gas pricing
and the cost of emissions permits.
Of the total $716 million in refund offers cited by Wagner, the so-called Big
5 Power Generators in California had offered $510 million. The remainder
included $125 million offered by BC Hydro's Powerex, $49.6 million by a group
of 15 power marketers, $16.5 million by six California municipal utilities
and $25 million offered by "load serving entities" outside California.
"Many of the offers of settlement could with time result in an agreement,"
Wagner said.
Wagner also noted that California came "close to settlement" with Calpine
Corp. (CPN) during the negotiations. Calpine Vice President Joe Roman told
reporters that the agreement with California was "close to gelling."
Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
=====================================
|
3,667 |
Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3693.
=====================================
Additional agenda item for discussion this afternoon:
Opportunity to comment in EL00-95-20 on the issue of emergency relief for
QF's, and the possibility they may go off line.
A short blurb on the issue follows. Ray
Ridgewood Power submitted a Request for Emergency Relief and an Updated
Request for Emergency Relief requesting the Commission to take action to
prevent QF capacity from going off- line in the State of California.
Ridgewood asks the Commission to take actions that will permit those QFs in
California that have not been paid fully for past power deliveries to enter
arrangements to temporarily sell to third-party buyers within California.
Ridgewood asks the Commission to declare that California electric utilities
cannot deny transmission access to QFs or otherwise frustrate the ability of
QFs to sell to third-party purchasers.
The California Cogeneration Council filed a Motion for Emergency Relief
requesting the Commission to take action to prevent QFs from going off-line
in California. The Cogeneration Council requests the Commission to require
interconnection, transmission, and related services under section 210(d) of
the Federal Power Act on a temporary basis pending the resolution of accounts
receivable issues.
The Commission is also instituting a proceeding in which it will consider
whether and to what extent it may need to order the provision of
interconnection, transmission, and related services under Section 210(d) to
alleviate generation capacity supply shortages in California.
Ray Alvarez
05/02/2001 06:40 PM
To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W
Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Phillip K
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
Privileged & Confidential Communication
Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted
Date: Every Thursday
Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time,
Number: 1-888-271-0949,
Host Code: 661877, (for Jim only),
Participant Code: 936022, (for everyone else),
Attached is the table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings updated for
use on tomorrow's conference call. It is available to all team members on
the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as
appropriate.
Proposed agenda for tomorrow:
Power- Discussion of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in
EL00-95-12 and review of upcoming filings
Gas- Response to subpoenas of SoCal Edison in RP00-241 and upcoming items
Misc.
I will be unable to participate in the call tomorrow as I will be attending
the Senate Energy and Resource Committee Hearing on the elements of the FERC
market monitoring and mitigation order.
=====================================
|
3,668 |
Subject: Will you change the world today? (ECI press release)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/eci/110.
=====================================
Thought you all would like to see this.....
----- Forwarded by Scott Bolton/Enron Communications on 12/03/99 09:26 AM=
=20
-----
=09Tom Gros
=09Sent by: Michol Boyd
=0912/03/99 08:50 AM
=09Please respond to Tom Gros
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: EC Employees -- All
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: Will you change the world today? (ECI press release)
Will you change the world today?
On May 20 this year, we announced our intention to develop a liquid market =
to=20
trade bandwidth globally, allowing transactions to close in seconds, not=20
months. That statement involved several challenges. Technically, none of=
=20
the hardware or software was in place to allow such unprecedented=20
efficiency. Culturally, the industry viewed the =01&network=018 as the fib=
er that=20
they owned and =01&prices=018 as something that they controlled or numbers =
on an=20
approved tariff sheet. Respected consulting firms charged their clients fo=
r=20
lists of reasons the market would never develop. The industry=01,s leading=
=20
market research group published an article about our proposal entitled Grea=
t=20
Idea, Wrong Company. One of our major competitors=01*an experienced tradin=
g=20
firm=01*proclaimed that they knew markets, and that telecom capacity would =
never=20
be a commodity market, as if that were something bad. =20
We love it when people say it can=01,t be done.
Today, Enron transacted the first commodity bandwidth trade. This is Day O=
ne=20
of a potential trillion-dollar-a-year market. Global Crossing was the=20
counterparty to this first trade, and we expect to close a few more deals=
=20
with other companies before the end of the year.
This is an outstanding accomplishment for a team and a firm that just seems=
=20
to keep producing unbelievable innovations.
Can you think of any other firm that could have pulled this off? I can=01,=
t. =20
The range of talent required for such an accomplishment is mind boggling=01=
*
hardware engineering, software engineering, provisioning, property, legal,=
=20
regulatory, trading, sales, credit, tax, accounting, risk controls--the lis=
t=20
goes on and on.
We did it first because we were the only ones who could do it at all. As a=
=20
result, we will be able to offer our clients unique services that our=20
competitors have not even dreamed of yet. We will attract first a whole ne=
w=20
generation of talent from top schools looking to work with the industry=20
leader, not some dinosaur firm pointing to the way things have always been=
=20
done. We will learn first the lessons needed to have a flexible, global=20
network with =01&infinite route miles=018 without burdening our balance she=
et. We=20
will implement first an efficient means to manage the perishable bandwidth=
=20
that we own and operate, limiting the =01&spoilage=018 of our physical asse=
ts.
Will you change the world today? ECI=01,s response: Been there. Done tha=
t.
Congratulations and thanks to the team for a job well done. Again.
=====================================
|
3,669 |
Subject: Re: California state regulatory matters
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/851.
=====================================
Yes.
Leslie Lawner 07/05/2001 09:05 AM To: Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Phillip K Allen/Enron@EnronXGate, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Miller/Enron@EnronXGate, Roger O Ponce/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES cc: Rubena Buerger/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: California state regulatory matters
Let's try and set up a call to talk about the California intrastate gas issues noted below (LDC hedging, rate unbundling and system upgrades/expansions). Does Tues. July 10 at 3:00 Central work for everyone?
(Roger please pass on to EES folks who should be on).
Thanks.
----- Forwarded by Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron on 07/05/01 08:54 AM -----
James D Steffes 07/03/01 03:23 PM To: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: California state regulatory matters
Leslie --
Can you organize a call that goes through these issues and begins to rationalize the information requested by Phillip? While these issues are important, I don't see the CPUC doing anything in the near-term to help fix the problems.
Jim
---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 07/03/2001 03:22 PM ---------------------------
From: Leslie Lawner on 06/27/2001 12:59 PM
To: Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Phillip K Allen/Enron@EnronXGate
Subject: California state regulatory matters
Paul and Jeff,
Becky, Donna and I (gas girls) met with Phillip Allen (ENA West) to discuss FERC gas issues today, and Phillip had some issues that were more state than federal, and I told him I would bring them to your attention.
He is interested in seeing incentive rates or more hedging on the part of the CA LDC's so that all their needs are not being served by the spot market. In the current market, hedges (longer term contracting and financial) are being done primarily by the producers and marketers, which results in a thin and probably off-kilter market (the LDCs buying for the customers are not participating). I know we have to square this with the EES positions, but I am not up to speed on what is going on in CA on this issue.
Phillip also made that point that while the LDCs are focusing on their core load, no one is doing system planning on the macro basis, taking into account the ability of the physical systems to meet the needs of all customers, core and non-core and making sure the system will be adequate.
Finally, he is very interested in seeing the CA LDC rates unbundled.
Any updates we can provide to Phillip (and the gas girls) would be appreciated, as well as what our plans are to address these issues.
From our side, El Paso is having a conference in July and we will be taking up a number of allocation and transportation issues at that time.
Thanks.
=====================================
|
3,670 |
Subject: Action: Summary of Western Gov's Energy Summit
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/6050.
=====================================
gary, mary, steve,
please prepare a presentation that could be given to the high level people
trying to solve the california problem.
I would like to see an aggressive solution that shows that we have a more
expansive view of how to solve the problem with DSM than ever before thought
of.
I know you have a good start on that, but I would now like you to:
continue to refine the idea (refine might be expand and add implementation
details)
contact steve kean and jeff dasovich for feedback and further refinement
schedule meetings to start reviewing our view and listening to their view
refine again
imlement, implement, implement
Please send me the most current vision and a copy of the implementation
timeline by next Wednesday.
Thanks
---------------------- Forwarded by Marty Sunde/HOU/EES on 12/21/2000 06:43
AM ---------------------------
Wanda Curry
12/20/2000 04:11 PM
To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Summary of Western Gov's Energy Summit
Notice the first two bullets below.
Wanda
---------------------- Forwarded by Wanda Curry/HOU/EES on 12/20/2000 04:11
PM ---------------------------
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 12/20/2000 02:59 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron,
James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger
Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Chris H
Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D
Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Summary of Western Gov's Energy Summit
Paul Kaufman phoned with the following brief report from the Western
Governor's Association "Energy Summit" that took place today. Paul will
follow up with more detail when he gets back to a computer. The governors
issued the following recommendations:
California should immediately implement FERC's order issued last Friday and
aggressively pursue all available DSM and conservation opportunties.
The Western region should likewise be much more aggressive in identifying and
implementing DSM and efficiency opportunities.
Increase supply as soon as possible.
FERC should do an investigation into the potentially negative effects that
price caps can cause in the industry.
FERC should add to its investigations an investigation into what caused the
price spikes in the first week of December.
Work with the Bush transition team to make sure that someone from the new
administration is focused on the issue.
Hoecker said that he is not inclined to impose a region-wide cap until
California takes the actions it needs to take to help alleviate the situation
(e.g., reforming regs governing utility forward contracts).
Jeff
=====================================
|
3,671 |
Subject: PG&E Gas Accord II Settlement Proposal
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/gas_accord/1.
=====================================
Confidential Settlement Document
Per CPUC Rule 51
Gas Accord II Settlement Participants:
Attached is PG&E's Gas Accord II (GA II) Settlement Proposal. We believe it
addresses many of the issues and concerns you have raised in the workshops.
As an overview, this proposal:
* Maintains the basic Gas Accord structure in place today for the
period 2003 to 2007.
*
* Offers end user transportation rates for 2003 lower for most
customers than rates in effect today.
*
* Provides for vintaged Redwood path rates for core customers.
*
* Offers a 7.5 cent/dth rate to large customers while minimizing rate
changes to other customers, minimizing the incentive for these customers to
seek to bypass local transmission charges and other CPUC-approved charges.
*
* Adopts guidelines to improve reliability and help moderate prices in
gas commodity markets, and identifies the capital projects needed to meet
these guidelines over the course of the GA II period (2003-2007).
*
* Provides a high degree of rate stability, with a 3.5% escalator to
capture both inflation and the cost of needed capital projects. The
guaranteed rates will be adjustable only for significant changes in the cost
of capital or increased costs due to governmental requirements or
catastrophic events.
*
* Preserves a rate differential between the Redwood and Baja paths,
although somewhat less than the current differential.
*
* Proposes a two-stage open season for firm transportation services
beginning in 2003, with end users receiving a first option on available
capacity.
*
* Maintains the core aggregation program with some adjustments.
PG&E also anticipates that the Core Procurement Incentive Mechanism (CPIM)
will be similar to today's mechanism, but will reflect the somewhat larger
capacity holdings needed to meet anticipated increases in core demand and to
meet a 1-day in 10-year cold weather event.
This also will serve as a reminder that an all-Party meeting is scheduled at
PG&E's headquarters in San Francisco on January 10 and 11, to discuss this
proposal and to respond to your questions. We look forward to answering
your questions and receiving your feedback.
The attached documents include the GA II Settlement proposal, an Attachment
(a copy of PG&E's proposed Gas Rule 27), and a set of supporting workpapers.
Finally, please note that the Settlement document and the Attachment are in
"Word 2000" format. We would be glad to provide the same documents in an
earlier version of Word, upon request by individual Parties.
We look forward to seeing you on January 10-11. In the meantime, we extend
our best wishes for a safe and happy holiday season.
Frank Lindh Ray Williams
(415) 973-2776 (415) 973-3634
<<PG&E Gas Accord II Settlement Proposal 12-20-00.doc>> <<Proposed Gas
Rule 27.doc>> <<COS & Rates Workpapers for GA II 12-20-2000 Proposal.xls>>
- PG&E Gas Accord II Settlement Proposal 12-20-00.doc
- Proposed Gas Rule 27.doc
- COS & Rates Workpapers for GA II 12-20-2000 Proposal.xls
=====================================
|
3,672 |
Subject: ***IMPORTANT***TAR&L MEETING CHANGE
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1977.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 11/28/2000 10:41 AM -----
Angie Buis@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
11/28/2000 08:43 AM
To: Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sue
Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Michelle Hicks/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Lara Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jan
Haizmann/LON/ECT@ECT, Rajen Shah/LON/ECT@ECT, James Ginty/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Derenda Plunkett/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, David
Merrill/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Robbi Rossi/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Beth Wapner/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Ban Sharma/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jane
Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Richard Anderson/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Wayne Gardner/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
Subject: ***IMPORTANT***TAR&L MEETING CHANGE
Due to the unavailability of several players, we would like to move the
November 30th TAR&L meeting to Monday, December 4th, 8:30-noon in conference
room EB14C1. Please advise if you are unable to attend at this time.
Thank you!
Angie Buis
x-37097
----- Forwarded by Angie Buis/Enron Communications on 11/28/00 08:38 AM -----
Angie Buis
11/27/00 02:40 PM
To: Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sue
Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Michelle Hicks/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Lara Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jan
Haizmann/LON/ECT@ECT, Rajen Shah/LON/ECT@ECT, James Ginty/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Derenda Plunkett/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, David
Merrill/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Robbi Rossi/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Beth Wapner/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Ban Sharma/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jane
Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Richard Anderson/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Wayne Gardner/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
Subject: TAR&L MEETING - NOVEMBER 30TH
The next TAR&L meeting will take place on Thursday, November 30, 8:30 a.m. to
12:00 noon, in conference room EB43C1. Breakfast will be provided. The
call-in information is listed below.
International Participants: (304) 345-7526
Domestic Participants: (888) 271-0949
Passcode: 589792
Host (Houston) number: (888) 271-0949
Passcode: 281574
I have arranged for 4 domestic and 2 international ports. Should extra ports
be required, all the person will need to do is dial the appropriate number
listed above.
Additionally, we have scheduled another TAR&L meeting for Thursday, December
7th, same location, time and dial in numbers.
Should you have questions regarding any of the above, please do not hesitate
to call me at extension 37097.
Thanks.
Angie Buis
EBS-Tax
=====================================
|
3,673 |
Subject: NGI Article: ALJ Advocates Money Settlement in El Paso Dispute
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/62.
=====================================
NGI's Daily Gas Price Index
published : August 31, 2001
ALJ Advocates Money Settlement in El Paso Dispute
FERC Chief Administrative Law Judge Curtis Wagner Jr. yesterday "strongly encourage[d]" parties to reach a monetary settlement in the high-profile case in which California regulators have accused El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy Co. (EPME) of illegally manipulating natural gas prices in California and committing affiliate violations.
The parties should give "serious consideration to disposing of this case by a negotiated settlement," Wagner said in an order late Thursday, adding that it "would be in the interest of all" concerned. The pipeline capacity contracts at issue in the case "[have] been terminated for some time now; natural gas prices are down; and possible remedies, should abuse of market power or affiliate standards be found to exist, is not before the chief judge for decision, at least not at this point in time," he said.
Both sides "will agree that this case is extremely complex and controversial, and will be a very difficult one for the Commission to decide regardless of the initial decision's findings, and it is almost certain that there will be appeals [of] the Commission's decision," Wagner noted. "This means that a final determination in this case is a long time in the future."
However, "should a substantial monetary settlement be reached now, the people of California will benefit much earlier and perhaps much better than [from] a continuation of this litigation. The people of California deserve a quick end to this litigation and a settlement will provide them with a fair solution now."
He believes the parties would be "wise to work out a solution to their disputes that they can live with and know the outcome of, rather than take a chance on what a judge, the Commission and the courts may find." However, this "admonition...is not to be construed in any way that [I] will decide this case one way or the other," Wagner said, adding that he "has not and will not reach a decision" until he has reviewed and digested all briefs and proposed findings filed in the case.
Wagner presided over the hearing this summer exploring allegations that EPME intentionally withheld capacity from the market to drive up delivered prices for gas in California beginning in mid-2000, and that El Paso pipeline violated the Commission's affiliate standards by rigging the bidding process to favor affiliate EMPE during a February 2000 open season. EPME was awarded 1.22 Bcf/d of capacity on affiliate El Paso pipeline, which was more than one-third of the total capacity on its line. The 15-month contracts for the capacity expired in May.
In the event parties cannot reach a resolution, Wagner has extended the date for parties to submit reply briefs by one week to Sept. 14, given that the "magnitude" of the case is "somewhat overwhelming." He noted that he still "will make every effort to issue [an] initial decision on or before Oct. 9" in the case.
=====================================
|
3,674 |
Subject: Additional information for the Post MBA, Post Internet Start-Up
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11756.
=====================================
ALL ARE WELCOME TO ATTEND
Post MBA, Post Internet Start-Up Career Decisions 2001 Joint program Univ.=
=20
Mich. alumni, Haas alumni
$25 at the door. Please RSVP? [email protected]
Panel topic questions: o???????What short and long-term trends can be=20
expected in Bay Area job market for director level and above, executive=20
candidates?=20
o???????What are up and coming industries or fields in the Bay Area job=20
market. How can those jobs best be accessed?
o???????Assume a job candidate has experience at Internet start-up companie=
s,=20
perhaps several over the past 2 years. How should Internet start-up=20
experience be leveraged towards next career decision? How should this=20
experience be presented to next potential employer, especially if the=20
companies went out of business? Will candidates be penalized if they have=
=20
jumped from Internet start-up to Internet start-up over the past several=20
years?
o???????How does the job market of San Francisco compare to that of Silicon=
=20
Valley/South Bay? Is it worth it for residents of San Francisco to commute =
or=20
relocate to Silicon Valley/South Bay?
o???????What skills or experiences are necessary to make the jump from seni=
or=20
director level to vice president? From vice president to COO?
o???????In the past few years there was a glut of senior job titles at=20
start-up companies. Do you believe some people will have to downgrade their=
=20
title in their next career moves?
o???????Assume a job candidate has received an MBA degree from a top rankin=
g=20
school 5 years ago and has successfully progressed up an executive level=20
management career. At that point, what is the relative importance of the MB=
A=20
on the resume, versus the experience and accomplishments?
Target Audience:?=20
MBA Graduates and soon to be graduates
From University of Michigan, Haas School of Business, Kellogg, UT Austin,=
=20
Tuck. Other MBA alumni clubs invited. Director to Vice President Career=20
Level, mostly high tech and software related fields
Panel Members:
o???????John Morel, Associate Director alumni Career Services Haas School o=
f=20
Business
o???????Craig Smith, Consultant, Heidrick & Struggles,=20
o???????Brian McDugal, Vice President, Management Solutions,=20
o???????Margaret Steen, Careers Reporter, San Jose Mercury News,
o???????Moderator: Gretchen Alarcon, Director of Human Resources, Icarian,=
=20
Inc. (UMBS MBA 1997),=20
Date and Time:
Wednesday, May 2nd
Networking reception 6:00 p.m.?=20
Panel presentation 7:00 pm
Location:
Scores Restaurant? Conference Center
2200 Bridgepointe Parkway in San Mateo
650-357-1998
Directions:
Take Highway 101(or 280) to Highway 92 East before the San Mateo Bridge. Ex=
it=20
Mariner=01,s Island Blvd. ramp. Make a right turn at the light onto Mariner=
=01,s=20
Island Blvd. Make a right at next light onto Fashion Island Blvd. Follow in=
to=20
Bridgepointe Center at 2200 Bridgepointe Parkway. Free parking.
Event Contact Person:
Christine Mohan, 415-440-3367
=====================================
|
3,675 |
Subject: Re: FYI
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3780.
=====================================
Thanks. Let me try to rally the troops. Get them to submit something and
then maybe you and I can simply sign on.
Your humble servant,
Jeff
Jeffery Fawcett/ENRON@enronxgate
03/20/2001 05:13 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: FYI
Dude,
Not seeing (either of) the comments directly, its hard to say what our
position should be -- Mr. Dasovich, I'll leave that up to your good
judgment. However, it would appear that TURN is looking to roll back the
clock on any progress we might have made in the GIR process to separate
utility services and make them independently available to the marketplace.
On that basis, I'd say you've got a reasonable argument to make.
As far as Transwestern is concerned, I'd say that, as a general matter, we
oppose any change in regulations that would attempt to repackage or rebundle
utility services that gives the effect of reducing customer choice. On the
other hand, given the backdrop of a frustrated effort in the GIR proceeding,
as long as they're leaving Hector Road alone, its hard for me to get too
fired up about anything in California these days.
Let us know if there is anything you'd like us to do here. Ours is but to
serve, my liege.
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 4:22 PM
To: Fawcett, Jeffery; Scott, Susan
Subject: FYI
Greetings Mr. Newlywed and Ms Bride-to-be! (Shewt, I'm gettin' all choked
up.)
I think I'll need to protest TURN's proposal. You folks aware of this? Care?
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/20/2001 04:20 PM -----
"Daniel Douglass" <[email protected]> 03/20/2001 03:37 PM 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]>,
<[email protected]> cc: Subject: FYI
On 2/14, the Southern California Generator Coalition filed a petmod asking
that the Commission amend winter balancing rules to allow customers to bring
more gas into the system than the 10% imbalance rules permit and that
customers be allowed to use the previous month's accumulated positive
imbalance in lieu of flowing supplies.
The generator members of WPTF with facilities in southern California may be
interested in knowing that TURN's 3/15 comments recommend instead that the
Commission should rebundle the costs of storage for electric generators in
their transportation rates and requires SoCalGas to store gas on behalf of
those customers.
Let me know if you want to see the TURN comments.
Dan
=====================================
|
3,676 |
Subject: Global Agenda - New Economist Content From Economist.com
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['economist.com.readers":@enron.com']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1489.
=====================================
Dear Economist.com Reader,
The world is moving faster and so are we.
Economist.com is delighted to introduce a major new feature --
Global Agenda. For the first time in its 157-year history, The
Economist is able to offer you analysis of the most important
issues and events every day.
Global Agenda, located in the centre of Economist.com=01,s home
page (http://www.economist.com), complements The Economist
magazine by providing timely updates as major issues and events
unfold.
Global Agenda provides rolling coverage and analysis on six to
eight of the most important business and political topics each
day. A dedicated staff of Economist writers selects topics of
international significance to provide up-to-date and concise
analysis of how these events are affecting industry, governments
and individuals around the world.
This content is available only on Economist.com. The full-length
text of each story, along with pictures and charts, is available
by clicking on the link. The article is accompanied by links to
related Economist stories and relevant newswires and websites.
As world events and priorities change, articles will be updated
and new articles will appear. You can tell that a story has been
updated or changed by looking at the date following it. Major
changes to stories or new stories are noted in red.
As always, the entire print edition of The Economist
(http://www.economist.com/printedition) and our weekly
e-mailings (http://www.economist.com/members/registration) are
still available online at midnight GMT every Thursday.
If you have any comments or feedback regarding the changes to
our website, or any suggestions for future development, please
contact us on [email protected].
Thank you,
Andrew Rashbass
Managing Director, Economist.com
Quick Links into Economist.com:
* Home Page: http://www.economist.com
* Opinion: http://www.economist.com/opinion
* World: http://www.economist.com/world
* Business: http://www.economist.com/business
* Finance & Economics: http://www.economist.com/finance
* Science & Technology: http://www.economist.com/science
* People: http://www.economist.com/people
* Books & Arts: http://www.economist.com/books
* Markets & Data: http://www.economist.com/markets
* Diversions: http://www.economist.com/diversions
* Email & Mobile Editions: http://www.economist.com/email
* Shop: http://www.economist.com/shop
* Help: http://www.economist.com/diversions
* Subscription: http://www.economist.com/subscriptions
NOTE:
You have received this e-mail because you requested updates
about Economist.com. If you would rather not receive any more
of these emails from us, you can unsubscribe by going to the
Change Details section located under Emailings and Mobile
Edition and choosing the unsubscribe option at the bottom of the
page.
Alternatively, you can send an e-mail to
[email protected] with 'Unsubscribe' in
the subject line and we will make sure that you do not receive
any more Economist.com updates.
=====================================
|
3,677 |
Subject: RE: San Diego Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13117.
=====================================
I don't recall Lay saying that the increase should apply to DA customers. We
should discuss further just to make sure that we're all on the same page.
Best,
Jeff
Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate
05/24/2001 09:26 AM
To: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: RE: San Diego Update
Harry, Marty Sunde, Jeff Dasovich and I were on a trip with Ken Lay last
week. I understood from Marty that Ken may believe that all customers,
including direct access, should pay the increase you mention. Marty? This
was encouraging from a litigation exposure standpoint because, to the extent
all consumers are treated alike, our DA customers who were resourced to
utility service cannot claim to have been disadvantaged by our action. The
converse is also true: if they have to pay because they were put back on
utility service they may try to pass that cost through to us. To the extent
that any increase is to pay back DWR for buying power 2/1/01-3/31/02, and
those on DA are not required to pay this, EES could have a substantial
exposure to its customers. Maybe we need to modify our strategy to take
this into account.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kingerski, Harry
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 8:48 AM
To: Sunde, Marty; Benevides, Dennis; Dotson, Marcus; Williams, Robert C.;
Frazier, Lamar; Stoness, Scott; Johnson, Tamara
Cc: Lawner, Leslie; Steffes, James; Neustaedter, Robert; Mara, Susan;
Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: San Diego Update
SDGE's Advice Letter filing confirms that the ABX143 rate freeze of 6.5 cents
does not apply to direct access.
In hearings on SDGE's potential rate increase for large customers:
SDGE has proposed to allocate all retained generation to small customers
(below 100 kw). Large customers would be served by DWR (or be direct
access). It's apparent several parties have major problems with this.
It is interesting that SDGE has calculated the expected rate increase under
their plan as 2.86 cents. If large customers are allocated a piece of
retained generation, the increase goes up to 2.99 cents. In the latter case,
large customers retain a CTC (related to QF contracts and other long term
stranded costs) that they would lose in the former case.
Our involvement is to get an order 1) excluding DA from any rate increase
(the proposed 2.86 cents) 2) excluding DA from any surcharge related to
undercollection from the rate freeze (an amount that is not known at this
point) 3) prorating the surcharge related to undercollection if the customer
switches from DA to bundled service during the rate freeze period 4) ensuring
there is a return to market pricing once the rate freeze is over.
PUC decisions on these issues are expected June 28. There is no discussion
of restricting movement between bundled service and DA. On our issues noted
above, #1, 2, 4 have high probability of success; # 3 is 50/50.
=====================================
|
3,678 |
Subject: nan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3814.
=====================================
Ron,
I believe there is a problem with the
Underscheduling of Load Section. If your changes are the result of EES's
request, I think it is backwards. In other words, EES is ok with the
penalties on load, but wants a 10% spread because it is hard to manage
within the narrow band for smaller entities. I do not believe we should
suggest in the alternative anything for generators. I believe the comments
should be no penalty for generators for the reasons stated in Alan's
affidavit (last draft I saw this morning).
Thanks
Gary
3. The Proposed Penalty on Underscheduling Of Load
Should Not be Extended to Generators
The Commission proposed to impose a penalty charge for deviations in excess
of five percent of an entity's hourly load requirement of two time the ISO's
real time energy cost for any purchase of balancing energy during the hour.
November 1 Order at 26. Under these circumstances, while Commenters do not
object to the imposition of a penalty on loads, as proposed, we urge the
Commission to resist any calls that such penalties also be imposed on
sellers of electricity. Under the cost causation principle, the penalties
should be assessed solely on those entities that cause the underscheduling.
As has been widely observed, the primary cause of the underscheduling
problem this summer has been caused by loads. Thus, under the cost
causation doctrine, the Commission was correct to impose the underscheduling
penalty on loads but not generators.
In addition to the foregoing, imposing penalties on generators will create
incentives for generators to sell real-time power in markets outside of
California. This will increase the need for the ISO to make out-of-market
("OOM") calls. Comnes Affidavit at __ (describing that if a penalty is
placed on load, scheduling coordinators will have an incentive to remove the
power the real-time market and into day-ahead or forward markets). For all
of these reasons, we urge the Commission to affirm its determination to
impose the underscheduling penalties on loads but not generators.
If the underscheduling penalty is to be applied to LOAD, we request
that it be applicable only for deviations in excess of ten percent of a
LOAD's total hourly requirement. This is appropriate because because small
Scheduling Coordinators (smaller than the PX or ISO) have less diverse loads
and are subject to greater unforeseen swings. Scheduling within a band of
95% accuracy would thus be very difficult for many to achieve.
=======================================================
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,
use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of
the original message.
To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to
[email protected]
BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP
http://www.brobeck.com
=====================================
|
3,679 |
Subject: FW: Prehearing Conference Statement - COMMENTS NEEDED
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1542.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Thomas [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 8:58 PM
To: 'Dan Douglass'; ARM
Subject: RE: Prehearing Conference Statement - COMMENTS NEEDED
Dan
Responses to your questions:
I think Enron would like to exclude the PX Credit issue from this case. I am comfortable taking the lead from Enron on this issue and would support not advocating it be included in this case. I think SCE is going to push for its inclusion, so Sue will need to provide you with some amunition on why it doesn't belong in this case before Wednesday.
On the second question, no. I don't think we want to re-raise the rev req and tres letter leading to the end of DA.
I not sure we should push the bottoms up issue in this case. It is not at all clear what the ALJ is trying to pull into the case with the reference to post px credits. There is no pending matters on this, but for advice letters and protests. We are much better fighting in that forum given the current decisions rather than getting some nasty decision from Barnett that messes up the victory we got in the rate increase decisions.
I strongly urge that we NOT push this into this proceeding. It will be all downside. Changes to the PE Credit (i.e. reductions) may end up here, but we should not be calling for it.
Lastly, how can we say that the commission doesn't have authority to implement exit fees without changes in law given prior filings of ARM that said they should implement a whole host of exit fees rather than end DA. I don't think we can take this position without explaining the flip flop, which we certainly don't have room to do in the PHC statement. Maybe we can get away with referencing other parties strong position on this and support the requirement of hearings if any such attempt is going to be made to establish exit fees.
Thanks
Aaron
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 12:47 PM
To: ARM
Subject: Prehearing Conference Statement - COMMENTS NEEDED
Importance: High
Attached for your review and comment is a very rough first draft of the prehearing conference statement that we must bring to the hearing on Wednesday afternoon. It outlines, with some substance, the issues you have indicated we want to bring up, it identifies a few questions and seeks guidance from AReM members.
Please review and get back to me with comments by the close of the day, if possible. I am running to the airport (which is why this is not in as finished a form as versions normally sent to you) and will be looking for comments in my hotel room this evening.
Also, do we want to invite WPTF to join with us again, as it did in the comments last Friday on the Wood Ruling?
thanks!
Dan
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: (818) 596-2201
Fax: (818) 346-6502
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
=====================================
|
3,680 |
Subject: RE: First Write-Up due for Financial Information Analysis
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8770.
=====================================
"Sama, Anil" <[email protected]>
02/01/2001 01:02 AM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,
"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: First Write-Up due for Financial Information Analysis
Hi Team,
I did not get much time to work on the case today - got
pulled into a few meetings, and only just got back form
class. BUT, tomorrow looks good...
Jeff, Mark: can you send across what you have? Should
we shoot for a conf call around 12:00?
For Class 5 (i.e. second half tomorrow), didn't Sarah say
she was going to send across a pdf file on email, or put
something on Izio web site ? Did anyone receive this file?
-Anil
-----Original Message-----
From: Sama, Anil
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:04 AM
To: '[email protected]'
Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'
Subject: RE: First Write-Up due for Financial Information Analysis
Ok, Great.
I'm in class tonight, but will be working on the case today
around lunch. Sounds like tomorrow AM may be a better
time for a conf call - after everyone sends around their
analysis to each other. I'll take a crack at putting it all
together - as I am relatively free tomorrow.
- Anil
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:56 AM
To: Sama, Anil
Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';
'[email protected]'
Subject: Re: First Write-Up due for Financial Information Analysis
Greetings:
I'm in the group (and traveling on the East Coast, returning late tonite).
I can do a conference all today if folks would like. Otherwise, I'll be
working on it on the plane back tonite and will distribute when I get home
or first thing in the AM.
Best,
Jeff
"Sama, Anil"
<anil.sama@in To:
"'[email protected]'"
tel.com> <[email protected]>,
"'[email protected]'"
01/30/2001 <[email protected]>,
11:35 PM "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: First Write-Up due for
Financial
Information Analysis
Hey Guys,
Just sat down to read about the first write up that is due
this Thursday, and realized that this is supposed to be a
group assignment!! Ooops - I had no idea... Did you ;-)
Anyone read the case and/or taken a crack at it? Should
we try and co-ordinate a conference call?
Carolyn is out for the week and excused from the
assignment - just had a baby girl last Fri!!
Jeff, did you hear from teacher if OK to join ?
-Anil
=====================================
|
3,681 |
Subject: American Century Talks Bond Strategies with Schwab
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1459.
=====================================
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.
Email Alert
Mutual Fund Viewpoint(TM)
================================================================
Dear American Century Shareholder,
As a valued American Century shareholder, Charles Schwab invites
you to sample below the latest installment of Mutual Fund
Viewpoint(TM), a new Schwab subscription email product that
delivers timely information directly to you from participating
fund companies. Mutual Fund Viewpoint presents such valuable
content as portfolio manager commentary, sector and market
commentary, and newsletters. In its ongoing efforts to better
connect its Mutual Fund investors to the funds and fund
companies in which they invest, Schwab invites you to subscribe
now:
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=1678&m=100773bdf5c0400007794a
Schwab is pleased to provide the following information from
American Century.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Valued Investor:
American Century's Steven Permut, Vice President of municipal
portfolio management and credit research, recently talked with
Schwab investors about the enduring role of bonds in a
portfolio.
Learn why their role endures and how to look at bond strategies
for your portfolio with Permut's "Market Outlook" video
presentation.
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=1679&m=100773bdf5c0400007794a
This presentation was given in Pebble Beach, CA on August 28,
2001 to Schwab customers and representatives to provide timely,
relevant and educational market insights.
Please contact your Schwab representative to review your
individual needs or for more information about American
Century's complete lineup of fixed income mutual funds
available through Mutual Fund OneSource.
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=1672&m=100773bdf5c0400007794a
Thank you for your continued interest in American Century(R)
Investments.
----------------------------------------------------------------
For more complete information including charges and expenses,
please call Schwab's Mutual Fund OneSource(R) service for a
prospectus. Please read it carefully before investing or
sending money.
----------------------------------------------------------------
If you would prefer to receive only account service emails,
please reply to this email indicating your preference. Please
note: doing so will not remove you from any SchwabAlerts(R) or
email newsletters or information to which you have actively
subscribed.
For your protection, we are unable to accept instructions to
change your email address sent in reply to this message. To
update your address, please log in to your account using the
link below. From there you will be able to update your email
information securely.
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=1677&m=100773bdf5c0400007794a
Notice: All email sent to or from the Charles Schwab corporate
email system may be retained, monitored, and/or reviewed
by Schwab personnel.
(c)2001 Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. All rights reserved.
Member SIPC/NYSE. (1001-17059)
Distribution by Quris, Inc.
=====================================
|
3,682 |
Subject: RE: Do you know your costs?
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/mba__managerial_accting/1.
=====================================
For what its worth, see below. As a disclaimer I have little confidence
that the approach I took was the best one.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 8:36 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Do you know your costs?
Gentlemen;
While I pretend to know something about wine, I must admit I
know nothing about costing. Would you be so kind as to offer your
opinions on the following:
(1) Plastic rings- the 10K capital investment should not be
considered in the marginal cost, as it is an investment to be
depreciated over useful life of equipment (T/F) To cover my bets I did
it both excluding the 10K, and including the 10K, making different
assumptions in each case
(1b) For incremental (marginal) costs, we should not look at
overhead and period costs (ie in Vortec problem the S&A component was
held constant; is that true here as well even though these are allocated
based on direct labor)? I broke things down into variable overhead
(.8direct labor) and fixed, and assumed the fixed component didn't
matter since the way in which it was being allocated was somewhat
arbitrary and hence shouldn't guide decision making.
(1c) Variable overhead costs- are these in addition to the
fixed overhead costs (Mfctring + S&A), or should they be subtracted from
one or both? I interpret the controller's statement to mean that he
missed them in the schedule provided, and that we need to add them, in
addition to the other two. I interpreted it as part of total overhead,
not in addition to.
(2) For next 34500 steel rings, materials are sunk cost and not
included as a cost(T/F) T
(2B) same as (1B) incremental costs do not include Overhead
costs? I included the variable component of overhead (.8 direct labor)
but not other overhead.
Note trick for problem 2: Since the conversion to steel rings
would be done in the summer at a 100% direct labor rate, and since
workers in the summer would otherwise be getting paid at 70% rate for
doing nothing, one might interpret that the incremental cost of direct
labor is only 100%-70%=30% the rate it would otherwise be. This makes
the incremental cost of doing the steel to steel ring conversion much
cheaper than it would otherwise be.
(3) Differential cost means what? Difference in cost between
Finished Goods inventory and the WIP inventory? It seems to me that it
was undefined and hence you need to state explicitly what a relevant
comparison is and make it. In this case I interpretetd it as the
difference in cost between producing the steel rings and a like number
of plastic rings, and assumed that the cost of producing the steel rings
in inventory is 0 since its already sunk.
Your comments are greatly appreciated!
Jonathan
Jonathan Hudacko
415.305.4293 (HM)
510.649.6476 (WK)
----------------------------------------------
[email protected] is brought to you by
the Stanford Alumni Association and Critical Path.
=====================================
|
3,683 |
Subject: FW: Feinstein Legislation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/163.
=====================================
Jeff --
Per below, Jim thought you might be able to help with this if Sue is on vacation. Linda and I met with Sen. Feinstein's chief of staff last week and I will be calling her energy person this week to meet next week. Thanks.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James D.
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 8:25 AM
To: Shelk, John; Dasovich, Jeff; Mara, Susan
Subject: FW: Feinstein Legislation
John -
I think that Sue is still on vacation. Jeff may be able to help.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Shelk, John
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 2:33 PM
To: Mara, Susan
Cc: Steffes, James D.; Robertson, Linda
Subject: RE: Feinstein Legislation
Sue --
Just checking to see if there is any new word from IEP on the draft Feinstein legislation you had sent earlier. I have quietly alerted others in town -- such as EPSA and INGAA. NGSA -- the group that represents the natural gas producers -- is aware and sending comments to her this week. We have heard conflicting reports about whether she still intends to pursue the legislation -- at least on a stand alone basis -- and how much of a priority should will place on it in relation to other energy issues. I intend to call her energy staffer next week to sit down before the Senate Energy Committee resumes votes in September. Any news on this issue would be helpful. Thanks in advance.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mara, Susan
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 3:16 PM
To: Shelk, John; Steffes, James D.
Subject: RE: Feinstein Legislation
Sorry. I've been swamped trying to save direct access for the ingrates in CA. I'll get it right out to you by fax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Shelk, John
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:51 AM
To: Steffes, James D.; Mara, Susan
Subject: RE: Feinstein Legislation
Sue --
Jim forwarded your e-mail on the Feinstein legislation (draft). While she has talked about her interests conceptually in various hearings and meetings, we have not yet seen draft legislative language or more details. If you have draft language or more details (which it sounded like from your e-mail), please forward and we can discuss. Thanks for your assistance.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James D.
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:42 AM
To: Shelk, John; Mara, Susan
Subject: FW: Feinstein Legislation
John -
Can you please get with Sue?
thx
-----Original Message-----
From: Mara, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 1:48 AM
To: Robertson, Linda
Cc: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Alvarez, Ray; Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: Feinstein Legislation
I assume you're all over this, Linda.
On the off chance that you haven't seen it. Feinstein is asking IEP for comments on her draft legislation that would increase regulation of natural gas, define what just and reasonable rates would be and increase refund power on the electric side. I think we would have some concerns with her proposal. If you want to pass along our comments to IEP, just get them to me.
=====================================
|
3,684 |
Subject: RE: New Admissions Calls
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Diane Dimeff', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4459.
=====================================
Hi Jeff-
Howz it going? Long time no see - we need to do a happy hour so that we can
catch up! Hope you had a blast at the Resort at Squaw of couple of weekends
ago. Wasn't it a gorgeous weekend!
So, Meg called and asked me to contact one of the individuals on your list
of names because that person - Ashish Bhargava- had a specific question
around choosing between day and evening programs. Since I had to make a
similar decision, Meg thought I should talk to him.
If you have already called him, don't worry about it. If not, go ahead and
we can trade someone from my list, and I will call Ashish. Just let me know
who you pick on my list!
Take care,
Deepika
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Tambornino [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 4:15 PM
To: Ken Bruce; Deepika; Lesley Keffer; Michael Plumb;
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: Diane Dimeff
Subject: New Admissions Calls
Comrades:
Attached you will find the call assignments for the
new admits. We all have five or six people to call in
the next 7-10 days. I made a couple of matches where
it seemed there was some kind of similarity in
background or career, but for the most part, the
assignments were essentially random. The list
includes names, phones at home and work, company and
title.
Remember these are newly admitted students who have
not yet accepted our offer of admission. The deadline
to accept this offer is April 27th.
A general outline of the phone call, should you choose
to use it, would be:
1) Congratulations on being admitted to the Haas
School
2) indentify yourself as "involved with the student
government at the Haas School, and the evening office
asked me to give you a call to see if you had any
questions about the program. Then answer the
questions, if you can, or refer them to me or Ken for
further follow-up
3)describe your own experience at school and how it
has worked with your career--timing, advancement,
scheduling, tuition payments, etc.
4)invite them to attend a class so we can show them
around. EMBA office will coordinate.
5)remind them of the "New Students Admit Reception" on
April 19th from 7-9 in the Wells Fargo Room (drinks
and hors d'oeuvres served). (Refer to Diane's recent
email for other particulars.
Some pieces of information you might want to have
handy
-required new student orientation is August 11-12;
classes start on the 13th
-fees will be $1580 per unit; 42 units required,
including the two units for MPAR
-orientation packages will be sent out mid-June
-administration will call each new student in July
with class schedules
-second round of admits come out in early June
Thanks very much for helping. Let me know if there is
anything else you may need or could suggest to help in
this effort.
Joseph Tambornino
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
=====================================
|
3,685 |
Subject: Re: California governor signs 2 measures to deal with power crisis
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/276.
=====================================
Please add Shelley Corman in GPG to distribution lists on all California
issues related to crisis. Thanks.
From: Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 09/06/2000 10:01 PM
To: joe Hartsoe@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin@EES, Susan Mara@EES, Paul Kaufman@ECT,
Karen Denne@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich@EES, Mark Palmer@ENRON, James D Steffes@EES,
Richard Shapiro@EES, Elizabeth Linnell@EES, Jeannie Mandelker@ECT,
[email protected], Mark Schroeder@ECT, Peter Styles@ECT, [email protected], Mona L
Petrochko@EES, Peggy Mahoney@EES, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Mike
Dahlke/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Rob Bradley@ENRON
cc:
Subject: California governor signs 2 measures to deal with power crisis
California governor signs 2 measures to deal with power crisis
By SCOTT LINDLAW
Associated Press Writer
?
09/06/2000
Associated Press Newswires
Copyright 2000. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
?
?
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Legislation meant to ease the burden of power rate
spikes in Southern California and help avert future energy shortages in the
state were signed into law Wednesday by Gov. Gray Davis.
One measure spreads energy price increases over several years, and the other
speeds the approval process for new power plants. Davis deferred action on a
third, politically delicate bill, which would use taxpayer money to defray
the costs of rate increases in excess of 10 percent.
?
"This is not the last step we have to take to solve this problem, but it's a
very important first step," the Democrat said.
Opponents said the governor was approving merely a stop-gap solution for the
state's energy crisis.
"It is a quick political fix that puts on layaway today's high energy costs
until 2003 or 2004," said Doug Kline, a spokesman for San Diego Gas and
Electric. "The law is designed to get the politicians past the next
election."
Both measures would take effect immediately if they receive endorsement from
the Public Utilities Commission, which meets Thursday, the governor's office
said.
San Diego residents have seen their electric bills soar since rates were
deregulated in June. Deregulation was meant to lower prices, but demand for
electricity has outstripped supply because of a growing population, a booming
high-tech economy, and less power available from neighboring states that
haven't deregulated.
The utility commission last month cut rates for most San Diego residents by
43 percent in response to outcry over rising prices.
Under the first measure, rates for residential users would be capped at 6.5
cents per kilowatt hour, dropping the average monthly residential utility
bill from $120 to $68. Customers would receive rebates for energy use for
which they were charged more than 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour after June 1.
The measure seeks to avert causing San Diego Gas and Electric losses, but the
company said customers would face rate hikes in 2003 or 2004 to make up for
projected losses of $839 million stemming from the new law.
AP Photos SC103-104
=====================================
|
3,686 |
Subject: Keynote Speakers for CMTA Energy Conference -- FERC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28843.
=====================================
We usually send someone to these -- sometimes we even get to make a
presentation. Gov usually has someone there as well.
Wanted you to be aware of it.
Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 07/17/2001 12:20 PM -----
"Geri L. Royer" <[email protected]>
07/17/2001 12:05 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
cc:
Subject: Keynote Speakers for CMTA Energy Conference
July 17, 2001
To: CMTA Members
From: Jack M. Stewart, President
Date: July 16, 2001
Re: FERC Commissioners to Keynote CMTA Energy Conference
http://www.cmta.net/archive/2001_tahoe_conference.shtml
For all manufacturers who will ultimately pay the price for California's
energy crisis and for all those individuals involved with energy policy,
the only place to be from August 1-3 will be the CMTA Energy Conference
at Harvey's Hotel-Casino in South Lake Tahoe.
Headlining the Conference as Keynote Speakers are two of the five
Federal Energy Regulatory Commissioners (FERC). Commissioner Nora
Brownell will keynote the Thursday, August 2 session and Commissioner
Bill Massey will open the Friday session.
Commissioner Nora Brownell was nominated by President George W. Bush to
serve on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on April 30,
2001 and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on May 25. Prior to joining
the Commission, Ms. Brownell served as a member of the Pennsylvania
Public Utility Commission (PUC). During her tenure at the PUC, Ms.
Brownell took an active role in the roll out of electric choice in
Pennsylvania. In addition to her work in establishing the framework for
one of the most successful retail electric markets in the country, Ms.
Brownell was a leader in the administration of Pennsylvania's Electric
Choice Consumer Education Program.
William L. Massey was nominated by President Clinton and was confirmed
by the Senate in 1993. He was renominated and confirmed for a second
five-year term ending June 30, 2003. Commissioner Massey was the only
Clinton-appointed FERC commissioner to support Governor Davis' demand
for electricity price controls in the western states earlier this year.
The CMTA energy Conference agenda will include the latest information on
energy legislation making its way through the state capitol, an update
of pending CPUC decisions as well as a review of the various financial
proposals aimed at returning Edison and PG&E creditworthiness and
restoring direct access to California's electricity consumers.
We have scheduled panels of government and industry experts to discuss
Natural Gas Prices, Supply and Infrastructure; Managing High Prices and
Blackouts; Environmental Impacts and Trade-Offs; and two panel
discussions on present and future energy markets.
Please check our website at
http://www.cmta.net/archive/2001_tahoe_conference.shtml
to learn more about these critical issues and to register for CMTA's
2001 Energy
Conference at Harvey's in South Lake Tahoe.
- groyer.vcf
=====================================
|
3,687 |
Subject: RE: Mendocino
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/654.
=====================================
correction following further discussion with Amy: i have booked the blue iris room (apologies to the Jeffs) and Amy has booked a separate room for herself and Cal (i think the meadow view room).
-----Original Message-----
From: Amy Gustafson Finch [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 7:49 AM
To: [email protected]; 'Scatena, Pat'
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 'Jeff Walker (E-mail)'; 'Kari Ontko (E-mail)'; 'Lori Hom (E-mail)'; 'Madeleine Todd'; 'Nora McGee (E-mail)'; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Mendocino
Hello all,
I made a reservation at Cleone Gardens Inn, just across the street from the ranch. I reserved a room for Pat, Cal and myself, but was unsure what other reservations to make for the rest of the group because some of you are still tentative and I'm not sure who is bringing SOs/dates.
The inn has one room called the Blue Iris room with two double beds that might work for Jeff W. and Jeff D. if going up single; most of their other rooms have a queen or king bed (the Meadow View king room sounded nice for a couple if we have any going up). Both of those are still available for the weekend we are planning to be there. I think there may be some cottages available also for multiple people, but I'm not sure what the configurations of those are. A full breakfast can be ordered from some of the rooms for $14.00 extra. They serve breakfast at 8:00 a.m. Pat, Cal and I have a suite with a small kitchen, so we may also be able to host some minimal meals/snacks/drinks.
The phone number of Cleone Gardens is 1-800-400-2189. Their website, which has pictures and descriptions of their rooms, is cleonegardensinn.com. If the Cleone Gardens Inn does not have the room configuration you want, Lari's website (horse-vacations.com) has links to numerous other hotels and B&Bs.
Tally ho!
Amy
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 7:10 PM
To: Scatena, Pat
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Jeff Walker (E-mail); Kari Ontko (E-mail); Lori Hom (E-mail); 'Madeleine Todd'; Nora McGee (E-mail); [email protected]
Subject: RE: Mendocino
Hi All:
Madeleine was kind about me not keeping up with personal emails ....
I am putting the Mendocino dates on my calendar. I would like to ride both days. I would also like to stay where everyone will be happiest ;)
Howard's Creek is great, but I agree with Pat, that we just won't have the time to enjoy the place (or breakfast).
BTW - Are any non-riders coming??
Jeff.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeff Walker Office: (650) 632-7648
i2 Technologies Cell: (650) 868-7585
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=====================================
|
3,688 |
Subject: Ron's Outline of Comments to November 1 Order
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3160.
=====================================
Per the responses received, I have set the conference call referenced below
as follows:
Date: Wednesday, Nov. 8th
Time: 9:00am Pacific / 11:00am Central / 12:00pm Eastern
Dial In #: 888/232-0365
Pin #: 910576
Access code for Mary Hain ONLY: 202015
---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 11/07/2000 01:40 PM
---------------------------
Lysa Akin
11/06/2000 11:20 AM
To: [email protected], Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Richard B
Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron, [email protected], [email protected]
cc: Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Jan M King/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary
Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Ron's Outline of Comments to November 1 Order
Please advise your availability ASAP for a call on Wednesday, Nov. 8th at
8:30am Pacific / 10:30am Central / 11:30am Eastern
---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 11/06/2000 11:15 AM
---------------------------
Mary Hain
11/06/2000 10:41 AM
To: [email protected], Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan B
Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Christi Nicolay, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected],
Richard Sanders, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides, Neil
Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES,
Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Sarah Novasel@sarah
novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT
Subject: Ron's Outline of Comments to November 1 Order
Attached find Ron's outline of comments on the FERC's November 1 order in the
Section 206 proceeding. They are primarily legal arguments.
Concerning his comments about the congestion management redesign - I'm not
sure that we want to oppose LMP. I think instead we want to ensure that
there are not a large number of nodes.
Alan will be writing the technical comments on the $150 caps, not Seabron.
Sue called me this morning and said IEP will not be contesting the $150 price
cap. This is too bad because we had hoped they would carry the ball on
arguing why $150 is not sufficient to incent peaking generation. Sue is
working on IEP to try to get them to reconsider.
I think we also need to make sure we make all of the arguments that relate to
the CPUC's subpoena. I have asked Lysa Akin to set up a conference call
about this ASAP with Richard, Dan, Gary Fergus, Me, Mike Day, Sue, and Jim.
Please tell Lysa if I haven't listed you and you wish to be on this call.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 11/06/2000 09:27 AM
---------------------------
Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
From: "Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>
11/03/2000 02:58 PM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc: "Jeffrey Watkiss" <[email protected]>
Subject: Comments to November 1 Order
I have enclosed my thoughts on which issues to address in our comments.
- 0133539.01
=====================================
|
3,689 |
Subject: StartUp University: How to Build a StartUp: The Markets, The People
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/974.
=====================================
Hi all -
There is a great event held next week in San Francisco by StartUpUniversity.
(It IS the end of intrasession!!) At the event will be the Founder & CEO of
Startups.com & the Managing Director of a hot Biotechnology Venture firm who
will speak with and meet entrepreneurs
Details are Below:
How to Build a Startup: The Markets, The People & The Technology & Ten Steps
to Startup Success
Wednesday, October 18th, 2000
San Francisco, CA; 7:00 PM
Startup University
Donna Jensen, CEO & Founder of Startups.com will speak to other
entrepreneurs on those critical things that can make or break your
startup. Previous to Startups.com, Donna served as a member of VentureOne's
executive team and was director of marketing at Dun & Bradstreet. Donna has
also
held marketing positions at Procter & Gamble and Airborne Express. Donna
started her entrepreneurial career by founding Le Gourmet, a commercial
baking
company. Donna holds an MBA from the Kellogg Graduate School of Management
at Northwestern University and a BS from San Diego State University.
Mike Powell, of Sofinnova Ventures, will speak offering entrepreneurs
insight to raising money for their ventures. He will focus on
Biotechnology ventures in particular.
Michael joined Sofinnova Ventures in 1997. Prior to Sofinnova he was Group
Leader of Drug Delivery at Genentech (1990-97) where his focus was
developing new therapeutics. In 1987 he was part of the founding team of
Cytel and Director of Product Development, and was responsible for its
early growth culminating in a successful IPO. He received his Ph.D. in
physical chemistry from the University of Toronto in 1981, and postdoc'd in
bio-organic chemistry at the University of California where he later was
subsequently a faculty member (1981-84).
There are only 40 seats available! NOTE: IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
REGISTERING, YOU DO NOT NEED TO GO THROUGH NORMAL REGISTRATION!!
PLEASE SEND AN EMAIL TO:
Luiscarlos Paez at [email protected].
Luiscarlos Paez is a Project Manager at StartUpUniversity, and, as I have
mentioned in the past, a great supporter of Haas.
You can find more information about the event by visiting
http://www.StartupUniversity.com/sfbay
Startup University S.F. Bay Area Campus Sponsors:
Conxion's DotCom Incubator
--------------------------
Conxion's DotCom Incubator program offers FREE services to qualified
Internet startups, which include high-powered network access, managed
hosting services, datacenters, and technical services.
http://www.conxion.net/promo/incubator/Incubator.asp
Synapta
-------
Synapta is the technology team behind great Internet startups. Synapta
provides early stage Internet companies with technology strategy,
application development and site management services.
http://www.Synapta.com
Upside Magazine
---------------
Upside serves today's DealMakers with impacting commentary on the
business
of technology, provides daily investment updates and delves inside the
industry providing strategic analysis of the biggest deals.
http://www.Upside.com
=====================================
|
3,690 |
Subject: RE: OAT Valuation Model
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11171.
=====================================
Having worked with you on the Perfect project, I now know that your power
point skills are legendary. Would you mind volunteering to coordinate
putting all the stuff in to power point?
Anil Sama <[email protected]>
04/16/2001 04:24 PM
To: "Vavrek, Carolyn \(US - San Francisco\)" <[email protected]>,
[email protected], "'Mark Guinney'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: OAT Valuation Model
Nice job Jeff!
I can meet Tuesday evening, Sat PM, or Sunday.
-Anil
"Vavrek, Carolyn (US - San Francisco)" <[email protected]> wrote:
Jeff - Thanks for putting so much work into this. Excellent job!
I agree that we should figure out when we can meet again. I can meet
tonight, during break on Tuesday and basically anytime on Saturday or
Sunday. During break on Thursday I volunteered to help Diane with a new
student's reception, but I can cancel that if need be. What does everyone
else's schedule look like?
Carolyn M. Vavrek
Manager - Human Capital Advisory Services
Deloitte & Touche
50 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
phone: 415-783-5137
fax: 415-783-8760
e-mail: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 8:56 AM
To: '[email protected]'; 'Mark Guinney'; Cvavrek
Subject: OAT Valuation Model
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron! on 04/16/2001 10:53 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff To: "Sama, Anil"
Dasovich cc: "'[email protected]'"
,
[email protected], "'Mark
Guinney'"
04/16/2001 Subject: OAT Valuation
Model(Document link:
10:52 AM Jeff Dasovich)
OK folks. It's about 80% of the way there. My brains are oozing out
looking at cells, so I want to get this around so Mark can get started on
refining assumptions and other folks can examine as well. I'll continue to
check it and de-bug it. Mark, you and I should talk, too. (You'll note
that at this point, the valuation is in the $30s, so there's work to do.)
Apologies in advance for any errors (and I'm sure they're there).
If anyone has any questions on the model, just let me know.
I think we ought to get together to meet this week as much as possible to
start g! etting the power point presentation together. And perhaps we should
think about meeting this weekend?
In the meantime, I'm pulling together the data on Buffet (Berkshire
Hathaway) stock performance, etc., and will also do the financial ratios,
including Dupont, for OAT.
Does this work for folks? Other thoughts?
Best,
Jeff
(See attached file: OAT Valuation 0416.xls)
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If
you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this
message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
=====================================
|
3,691 |
Subject: PG&E opens bids to add 1.2 bcf of natgas in Calif
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13227.
=====================================
Please forward to anyone else who might be interested.
---------------------- Forwarded by Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT on 05/30/2001
06:11 PM ---------------------------
"Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]> on 05/30/2001 05:59:43 PM
To: <[email protected]>, "Charles Shoneman"
<[email protected]>, "Randall Rich" <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: PG&E opens bids to add 1.2 bcf of natgas in Calif
FYI
Wednesday May 30, 3:55 pm Eastern Time
PG&E opens bids to add 1.2 bcf of natgas in Calif
(UPDATE: adds background in paragraphs 6-11)
SAN FRANCISCO, May 30 (Reuters) - Pacific Gas & Electric Co., in an effort to
determine interest in expanding its California natural gas pipeline system,
said it was accepting bids for up to 1.2 billion cubic feet a day (bcfd) of
gas transport capacity.
The move by the company, a subsidiary of San Francisco-based PG&E Corp.
(NYSE:PCG - news), responds to California's growing demand for natural gas to
run new power plants.
Gas suppliers and big industrial customers participating in the bidding
round, called an open season, have until July 31 to submit offers stating how
much pipeline capacity they are willing to purchase and the price they are
willing to pay.
Based on the results of this round, PG&E will decide whether to proceed with
the planned 1.2 bcf expansion -- enough to run seven 1,000 megawatt gas-fired
power plants -- or modify it to accommodate an even bigger volume of gas.
As it stands, PG&E's open season is offering firm capacity on its its
Redwood, Baja, and Silverado pipelines.
These lines transport gas from Malin, Oregon; Topock, Arizona, and California
gas production to the company's local transmission system and other pipelines.
PG&E's current intrastate pipeline system can transport more than 3 bcf of
gas a day throughout Northern and Central California.
Over the past year, utilization rates on many California pipelines have
jumped from 75 percent to near full capacity, limiting deliveries into the
state needed to drive gas-fired power plants.
Demand for gas, which already accounts for more than a third of California's
power generation, is expected to jump.
Since April 1999, California has approved 14 major gas-fired projects with a
combined generation capacity of more than 9,500 megawatts. Ten gas-fired
plants, with a total generation capacity of more than 6,000 megawatts, are
already under construction.
Over the past three months plans to build or expand interstate lines carrying
gas to California have been announced by Sempra Energy (NYSE:SRE - news) unit
Southern California Gas Co., Enron (NYSE:ENE - news) unit Transwestern,
Williams Cos' (NYSE:WMB - news) unit Kern River Transmission, El Paso Corp.
(NYSE:EPG - news) units El Paso Natural Gas Co. and Mohave Pipeline Co.,
Questar Corp. (NYSE:STR - news), Calpine Corp. (NYSE:CPN - news) and Kinder
Morgan (NYSE:KMP - news).
=====================================
|
3,692 |
Subject: Re: Draft letter to full Commission re GIR PD
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4246.
=====================================
There is much that is valuable in this letter, and a number of things are
brought to light. However, in light of our initial plan, to provide an
easy to scan piece for "any fourth grader" and to produce something for
release to the press, I am concerned that the approach taken in this letter
is a little too legalistic for our target audience. I was thinking that
something simpler and more designed for the common man might be
appropriate.
With fingers blazing to get a fleshed out outline out quickly, and little
regard for proof-reading or details, I have produced the attached "fleshed
out outline." It is a little less than a first draft, but more of a
feeling for the way I think we might want to proceed. I am not
volunteering to take over the letter, you understand, but I would like to
suggest this different approach.
Procedurally, I would rather Mike Day continued to serve as the gatekeeper
for this one.
(See attached file: my version of the PDletter.doc)
--
Michael S. Alexander
Southern California Edison
626-302-2029
626-302-3254 (fax)
MBD
<[email protected] To: "'Pocta, Robert M.'"
<[email protected]>,
om> "'Counihan, Rick'"
<[email protected]>,
12/01/2000 "'[email protected]'"
04:54 PM <[email protected]>, John
Burkholder
<[email protected]>, Mike Alexander
<[email protected]>, Craig Chancellor
<[email protected]>, Colin Cushnie
<[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich
<[email protected]>, MBD
<[email protected]>, Paul
Amirault <[email protected]>, Doug
Porter
<[email protected]>, Tom Beach
<[email protected]>,
"'Amirault, Paul'"
<[email protected]>, "'Craig
Chancellor,
Calpine'" <[email protected]>,
"'How-Downing,
Lindsey'"
<[email protected]>, "'Phil
Davies, WGSI Calgary'"
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Draft letter to full
Commission re
GIR PD
Here is the draft letter. We received no input from anyone. So this
represents our best shot. Please edit mercilessly. Please share only
with
CSA signatories. Please comment by email or in person or by phone at the
socalgas meeting, where I will distribute the letter and seek support.
Thanks, Mike Day
<<X18828.DOC>>
(See attached file: X18828.DOC)
- my version of the PDletter.doc
- X18828.DOC
=====================================
|
3,693 |
Subject: FW: Information needs survey - extended
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1968.
=====================================
Please see note from Elizabeth below, and respond directly to Rita Hartfield by tomorrow!!!
Ginger Dernehl
Administrative Coordinator
Global Government Affairs
Phone# 713-853-7751
Fax# 713-646-8160
-----Original Message-----
From: Linnell, Elizabeth
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:56 PM
To: Dernehl, Ginger
Subject: FW: Information needs survey - extended
I wanted to be sure that everyone had the opportunity to give their input if interested! If you haven't already responded, below is a list of potential/existing information resources and we invite you to identify your top five priorities (1=high). Responses should be directed to Rita Hartfield by tomorrow, October 18th.
Thanks!
Elizabeth
-----Original Message-----
From: Linnell, Elizabeth
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 12:41 PM
To: Dernehl, Ginger
Subject: Information needs survey
Ginger - Please forward to Gov't Affairs group. Thanks!
We're trying to identify information needs - both specific and general. Many of these are already provided, and response to this survey will help in identifying new services and prioritizing/improving existing offerings. Depending on the response to each offering, most will likely be made available. For this effort, please rank up to five choices in the list below (1=highest). We'll tally the results, identify which items will have priority and communicate back how those needs will direct implementation efforts. Please note that items marked with (*) would require your input. Please click on Forward for this message to allow you to type in your ranking numbers, and send the response to Rita Hartfield by Wednesday, October 17.
Thanks!
Elizabeth
( ) Catalog of web resources. [Including websites, electronic documents]
( ) Catalog of Enron presentations and group member presentations.
( ) Catalog of statistical data and information (some in slide format). [Might include information like generation statistics, company information, various maps, customer migration data, and anything else of general interest and use.]
( ) Individual access to in-depth research tools [Might include access to Lexis.com, market data tools like PowerDat, etc] Most applications would require some level of training, and might involve subscription costs.
( ) Primary research contact assigned by subject matter expertise..
( ) *Up to the minute restructuring data.
( ) *Enron formal documents [filings, comments, testimony]
( ) Catalog of Enron internal position statements
( ) Catalog of Enron public documents [policy talking points, handouts]
( ) Ad-hoc research upon request.
( ) News clipping services
( ) *Group calendar of significant events with links to associated documents.
( ) Catalog of print publications that we currently own that would be available for loan [books, periodicals, studies]
( ) Thumbnail analyses by industry experts on various topics
( ) Other:
How much time per week are you willing to spend to contribute to certain items (marked with *): hours
=====================================
|
3,694 |
Subject: RE: Angelides Oct. 19th Letter to L. Lynch Urging July 1 DA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/829.
=====================================
FYI. Note below that even the mighty and powerful Power Authority's own crackerjack analysis asserts that there is still a net short (despite DWR contracts and DA "stampede"), which should leave one to believe that, contrary to Angelides' letter, the more the DA the better. Which further supports Loretta Lynch's response to the Angelides' letter that DA reduces the amount of spot power DWR has to buy.
Best,
Jeff
CONSUMER POWER AND CONSERVATION FINANCING AUTHORITY
Pace of Power Authority Renewable Portfolio Agenda is Slowed
Quite possibly the most significant action taken at the October 19 Consumer Power and Conservation Financing Authority (Power Authority) was its inaction on contracts proposed for approval. The Power Authority has aggressively pursued a broad renewable portfolio, with the intent to approve contracts as soon as possible.
Instead of approving a number of contracts on its October 19 agenda, the Power Authority deferred calendared decisions on request for bids until its November 2 meeting, acknowledging that no action can be taken until the Department of Water Resources (DWR) rate agreement stalemate has been resolved.
Chairman Freeman stated that the Public Utility Commission's rejection of the rate agreement has created an obstacle for the Power Authority to exercise renewable contracts, to contract for peaker generation and/or to implement demand side programs. The Power Authority relies upon DWR's credit to fund these programs, and until a rate agreement is finalized the Power Authority cannot sign contracts.
Freeman indicated that the Power Authority has signed letters of intent to purchase output from 14 biomass facilities in the Central Valley, as well as 400 MW generated by wind.
With the Current Glut of Contracts, Why Do We Need Additional Reserves?
Kellan Flukinger, Senior Advisor to Chairman Freeman and Laura Doll, provided a detailed presentation explaining why he believes the Power Authority must contract for additional renewable and peaking generation. Flukinger believes that despite direct access and the current glut of electricity supplied in long-term contracts, there still appears to be a net short of a few thousand megawatts within the State.
Flukinger concluded that the State still is at the mercy of electric generators who are not subject to PUC regulatory authority and who have no real obligation to build and maintain new facilities or to serve customers within the State. He believes that the short-term contracts and spot purchases leave the state vulnerable to price-spikes and supply shortages. He believes that the reserve can be managed through Time-of-Use and Real-Time-Pricing, conservation, interruptibles, demand side management, renewables and peakers.
Power Authority Names William Barry as Chief Financial Officer
William Barry was approved as Chief Financial Officer of the Power Authority at its October 19 Board meeting in Sacramento. Mr. Barry currently works for the City of San Francisco, and has worked in the past for the New York Power Authority.
=====================================
|
3,695 |
Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/148.
=====================================
FYI Item: Rob Gramlich, formerly with FERC, PJM, and, most recently, PG&E NEG will be taking a position as Chief Economic Advisor for Chair Pat Wood, effective I October.
For what its worth, Belden, Gramlich, and I all worked together in the mid-90s. (I hired Rob as a research assistant in 1994 when I was a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.)
Alan Comnes
-----Original Message-----
From: Comnes, Alan
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:13 PM
To: Alvarez, Ray; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; '[email protected]'; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. (Legal); Lindberg, Susan
Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted
Another agenda item
I got a call today from Bob Pease, Attorney with Market Oversight and Enforcement at FERC, 202-208-0131, to invite Enron to a meeting called by Chairman Wood at the CAISO offices on 24-25 Sep 01. The purpose of the meeting is to try to get the FERC, CAISO, DWR and other market participants to work out issues related to reliability that have arisen in recent months. Issues include those that that affect operations and reliability such as the must-offer requirements, ramping, etc. He was not clear as to whether they would address creditworthiness issues. From the FERC staff "non-decisional" employees will attend. He invited solutions/proposals in advance of the meeting. Enron needs to decide who to send.
Alan Comnes
-----Original Message-----
From: Alvarez, Ray
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:31 AM
To: Comnes, Alan; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; '[email protected]'; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. (Legal); Lindberg, Susan
Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted
PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR
Date: Every Thursday
Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time
Number: 1-888-271-0949
Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only)
Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else)
The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate.
Proposed agenda for tomorrow:
CAISO filed Amendment No. 40 which would suspend the use of
preliminary invoices and disbursements.
CA refund proceeding status.
Please feel free to communicate any additional agenda items to the group .
=====================================
|
3,696 |
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/74.
=====================================
Dear folks:
Hope all finds you well, given the circumstances. I would very much like to go, but I continue to be embroiled in the energy mess and school has started (last year!). Turns out I'm going to have to be in Southern California that Friday and part of Saturday for work. I'm going to have to cancel. If there are any charges, please let me know. Hope to see all of you very soon. Be safe.
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Scatena, Pat [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 10:03 AM
To: 'Madeleine Todd'; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Dasovich, Jeff; [email protected]; Luis Pine
(E-mail)
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride
that's really too bad, i hope you are still able to make it. I am still
planning to go, but will definitely be riding only on Sunday and might drive
up on Saturday instead of on Friday. Lu, I'll call you after I talk to Jeff
to confirm whether he's still going.
p
-----Original Message-----
From: Madeleine Todd [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 6:50 PM
To: [email protected]; Scatena, Pat; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Luis
Pine (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride
Hey guys--
It is my hope that you and your loved ones have not been directly
affected in the tragedy.
I assume that the trip to Mendocino is still going forward. I am not
happy to report that my lower back has gotten worse and not better since
the accident in Hawaii. Sadly, I may have to pass on Mendocino. I will
find out more this upcoming week and let you know.
If I do have to cancel I would assume we should keep the Grandma's room
for Jeff & Lu. If there are any potential cancellation charges I should
pay to Lari please let me know. I have been looking forward to this for
so long, I am sad to think of not joining all of you.
I will get back to you by Wednesday.
Madeleine
-----Original Message-----
From: Amy Gustafson Finch [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:05 PM
To: 'Scatena, Pat'; Madeleine Todd; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride
Hi Group,
Need input for Lari as our ride approaches (Pat can you forward to Lu
and
ask him to reply to me).
I know some of you have ridden with Lari many times, but her scheduler
is
facilitating this process and has asked for some information. Please
provide the following and I will batch and send to Lari:
Years riding
How often currently riding
type of riding (i.e. English lessons, dressage, trail)
type of saddle preferred
age, height and weight
Also, we initially planned on an all-day ride on Sat, and a four-hour
ride
on Sunday so we could all head back relatively early. Lari would like
to
know where we want to ride on each day. Nora is only riding for the
four-hour ride, and prefers the beach. How about an all-day ride in the
redwoods on Saturday, with a four-hour beach ride on Sunday?
Amy
=====================================
|
3,697 |
Subject: DG Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/690.
=====================================
So sorry, I thought I had sent out this e-mail on my last day 9-6-00. Instead
I had saved it as a draft. Some of the information is out of date, but useful
for reference.
Interconnection Workshop Report: The supplemental CEC Draft Committee Report
was issued 9/1/00. The Report will be heard at the CEC on 9/7. We will have
an opportunity to file written comments on the draft report if the issue is
not fully addressed at the hearing. Written comments must be served on the
99-DIST-GEN(2) service list and received by the Energy Commission by 5:00 pm,
Pacific Daylight Time on September 15, 2000. No late filings will be
accepted under any circumstances. For purposes of meeting the deadline,
however, you can e-mail your comments to Scott Tomesheski at
[email protected] by the above-mentioned deadline. We will still
need to file an original and 10 sets of written comments to the Energy
Commission docket office.
The Siting Committee is expected to release a revised report by September
29th. The full Commission anticipates considering the supplemental
recommendation for approval at its October 18th business meeting.
Bob Frank has been added to the distribution list.
Interconnection Rules: The interconnection rules do not address Exporting.
They do not prevent Exporting. This is good because modification to the rules
would have to be done by petition to modify the final decision
Interconnection Agreement: We managed to not exclude Exporting from the DG
interconnection Agreement. however, the agreement does not explicitly
address. Exporting. It allows for supplemental agreements to be attached to
the extent that they are under the CPUC jurisdiction. If the CPUC asserts
jurisdiction over the retail wheeling, the agreement will be valid and will
need additional attachments. Modifications to this document can be done by
Advice Letter filing.
Interconnection Application: This document does not include exporting, except
if you are QF and exporting under 100 kW. Once approved, modifications to
this document to this document can be done by Advice Letter filing. We may
want to address this issue in written comments by 9/7. We may also want to
wait how the CPUC rules on retail wheeling and then address the issue.
ISO issues: The ISO will be filling at the FERC metering and scheduling
requirement for DG units - Participating Generators or other. The ISO intends
to file at FERC shortly. I asked Jeanne Sole of the ISO to contact Sue with
the schedule.In short the ISO would like to require that gross Load and
generation be Scheduled by the ISO at the transmission as well as
Distribution level. The ISO intends to require all participating generation
of 1 MW and above and all Generation of 10 MW and above to meter there gross
generation (whether for self consumption or export. They intend to require
telemetric meters, resulting in high installation, purchase and operational
costs. They also intend to apply GMC and TAC on gross generation including
generation for self consumption.
=====================================
|
3,698 |
Subject: FW: Bloomberg article
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/593.
=====================================
--
California Power-Price Boost Not Needed, Agency Says (Update1)
By Daniel Taub
Sacramento, California, July 13 (Bloomberg) -- California regulators won't need to raise electricity prices for consumers to cover a planned $13.4 billion bond sale, said a spokesman for the agency that buys power on behalf of the state's utilities.
The California Department of Water Resources, which has spent more than $7.7 billion on power this year, is expected to recommend a rate increase of as much as 25 percent, Dow Jones reported today, citing three unnamed members of the state's Public Utilities Commission. Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the agency, said no rate increase is expected.
``Our folks are stunned by this revelation because it is nowhere near what our numbers show,'' Hidalgo said. ``In fact our numbers show that there is no need for any increase beyond what's already been done.''
The Department of Water Resources will submit a report to the California Public Utilities Commission today or Monday with the state's revenue requirements for repaying a planned $13.4 billion bond sale, Hidalgo said. The bonds are to be repaid by customers of utilities owned by PG&E Corp., Edison International and Sempra Energy.
The bond sales, the largest municipal offering in U.S. history, are scheduled to begin in September. Governor Gray Davis has said repeatedly that he believes the bonds can be repaid without further rate increases. His position hasn't changed, spokesman Steve Maviglio said today.
Previous Increases
In March, the PUC voted to boost rates by 3 cents a kilowatt- hour at the state's two largest utilities. Rates at PG&E's Pacific Gas & Electric, the largest California utility, would rise by as much as 36 percent and Southern California Edison rates would rise by as much as 27 percent, the PUC said at the time.
The average consumer-price increase would be 30 percent, the PUC said. The increase, the second this year, was intended to help the state pay for power purchases. The PUC voted in January to raise rates about 10 percent.
California Treasurer Philip Angelides has said that the bonds will let the state cushion the immediate rate impact on residents and businesses by spreading power costs over time. The debt will be repaid over 15 years.
Investors have said they can't predict how the bonds will be received without knowing how much cushion is built into the revenue pledge backing the debt.
Legislation that paved the way for the bonds allows the state to raise electricity rates as needed to cover debt repayment. That pledge, typical for revenue bonds, usually entails a promise to raise a specific level of money annually to cover interest and principal payments on the debt and provide an added cushion.
That formula, known as a debt service coverage ratio, must result in investment-grade ratings for California's power bonds, according to the legislation. Investors want assurance that an issuer will raise rates to maintain the promised cushion, even if increases aren't needed at the time of the bond sale.
=====================================
|
3,699 |
Subject: Re: Language on bonds
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/849.
=====================================
It's going to be extremely difficult for anyone who has consumed electricity to avoid paying for it. It will be particularly difficult for Enron to exempt itself from costs incurred by the state on behalf of Enron's customers. Prior to us pushing amendments on this bill, can we discuss on the 11:30 call today. Harry and I have discussed this at length, and I just want to make sure that we don't blow up the whole enchilada by trying to get an amendment here.
Best,
Jeff
Harry Kingerski 07/03/2001 09:28 AM To: Hedy Govenar <[email protected]> cc: Bev Hansen <[email protected]>, Jim Steffes <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich <[email protected]>, Leslie Lawner <[email protected]>, Mike Day <[email protected]>, Paul Kaufman <[email protected]>, Rick Shaprio <[email protected]>, Scott Govenar <[email protected]>, Sue Mara <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Language on bonds
Hedy, Scott, Bev - the language currently says the bond surcharge will apply "to all electric power delivered in California by electric corporations ..." I know this is a longshot, but is there any chance of having this amended to either
1) exclude volumes under DA contracts as of the effective date of this act, or
2) more generally leave it to the PUC to adjust the surcharge for customer classes based on their contribution - or lack thereof - to DWR's purchasing requirements.
The justification for this exemption is grounded in excluding customers who have not caused the DWR problem; e.g. large San Diego customers or PGE/SCE customers who have been DA the last couple years or parts thereof. (We can give you some specific language.)
Hedy or Scott - could you please call me when you get in - 713 853-5786. Thanks.
Hedy Govenar <[email protected]> 07/02/2001 06:51 PM To: Sandra McCubbin <[email protected]>, Paul Kaufman <[email protected]>, Sue Mara <[email protected]>, Rick Shaprio <[email protected]>, Bev Hansen <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich <[email protected]>, Karen Denne <[email protected]>, Jim Steffes <[email protected]>, Scott Govenar <[email protected]>, Ken Smith <[email protected]>, Mike Day <[email protected]>, Michael McDonald <[email protected]>, Alan Comnes <[email protected]>, Steven Kean <[email protected]>, Harry Kingerski <[email protected]>, Leslie Lawner <[email protected]>, Robert Frank <[email protected]>, Janel Guerrero <[email protected]>, Miyung Buster <[email protected]>, Jennifer Thome <[email protected]>, Eric Letke <[email protected]>, Mary Schoen <[email protected]> cc: Subject: Language on bonds
Senator Burton's office expects bond language back from Legislative
Counsel sometime tomorrow, Tuesday. As soon as we get a copy we will
forward it. If the language is acceptable to Enron, then Bev, Scott and
I need to visit with Republicans to urge their support as soon as
possible.We are continuing to coordinate with the big users and some
other suppliers on this issue.
<Embedded StdOleLink>
=====================================
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.