dataset_id
int64 0
5.47k
| email_body
stringlengths 800
9.73k
|
|---|---|
4,400 |
Subject: The Original Advantage #e10607
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28550.
=====================================
[IMAGE]
July 09, 2001
Can't read this email? Click here
Issue#: e10607
PROVANTAGE Customer: [email protected]
To unsubscribe from the?
Original Advantage Click here
(Do Not Reply to this email)
Products that give you the Professional Advantage!
[IMAGE]
Delphi v6.0 Enterprise
By Borland
Next-Generation e-Business Development
Delphi 6 makes next-generation eBusiness development with Web Services a
snap. BizSnap Web Services ...More
UPGRADE FROM ENTERPRISE 5.0??$1989.67
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Pocket ExDrive 2.5" Hard Drive Kit
By Addonics
Removable Hard Drives for DOS 5.0, Windows 3.1, Windows 9x/Me, Windows NT,
Windows 2000 & Mac. Each kit includes either USB or PCMCIA cable - ...More
??$81.02
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
MKS Toolkit for Developers v7.5 for Windows
By MKS Software
MKS Toolkit Benefits:
Automate repetitive tasks and scripts.
Remote access and remote administration.
Automated Backup utilities.
Develop programs across multiple operating systems.
New SNMP utilities that let you control and monitor network hubs, switches,
and workstations.
??$317.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Xenofex v1.0 Single User
By Alien Skin Software
A collection of 16 inspirational special effects -- energizes any graphics
project. Realistic natural phenomena & sophisticated distortions ...More
??$95.76
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Smart-UPS 700
By APC
Smart-UPS protects your data by supplying network-grade battery backup when
power fails. With PowerChuter plus software the uninterruptible power supply
...More
??$329.00
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
DVD-to-Go ZV-Notebook PC Card Plays DVD/MPEG2 MPEG
By MARGI Systems
DVD-to-Go offers application and technical features that distinguish it from
other multimedia competitors: Decodes High Quality DVD encoded MPEG-2 video,
...More
??$164.88
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
CUV4X-E ATX FCPGA SND 6PCI AMR 4DIMM 4XAGP 133FSB
By ASUS
The ASUS CUV4X-E Mainboard is based on the VIA 694X chipset with ATX form
factor for the latest support in Intel Pentium II/III 266MHz1GHz+ Coppermine
...More
??$109.53
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
PYRO PlatinumDV for Desktop for PC
By ADS Technologies
Professional Video Editing with Adobe Premiere 6.0
The complete solution for capturing and editing digital video with
professional, broadcast-quality ...More
??$246.93
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
PaperPort Strobe Pro NT Sheetfed Scanner
By Visioneer
Visioneer Strobe Pro NT integrates the most advanced paper management
software with our unique compact sheetfed color scanner. The result is the
ideal ...More
??$219.44
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
New!
MM-2000 Flat Panel Speaker System
By Sonigistix
Monsoon MM-2000 is a five-piece surround-sound system that couples PFT Planar
Focus Technology with the awesome power of a 340-watt amplifier to deliver
...More
??$215.27
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
FriendlyNET FR3004C Cable/DSL Router
By Asante
The Asante FriendlyNET Cable/DSL Router shares your high-speed modem with up
to 253 users. Security features include a packet filtering firewall with NAT,
...More
??$137.77
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Enterprise 750 750VA True Sinewave Rack/Tower/Wall
By Para Systems
Features
True Sinewave Output
Scalable Unlimited Runtime via External Battery Packs with Independent
Chargers
Universal Design for Tower, ...More
??$227.65
[IMAGE]
?
?
Web Address: www.PROVANTAGE.com?
?Toll Free: 800-336-1166???? Fax: 330-494-5260???? email:
[email protected]
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | FREE Catalog
,2001 PROVANTAGE Corporation, 7249 Whipple Ave. NW, North Canton, OH 44720
Products, prices, terms, conditions, or offers may change at any time.
Company and/or product names are generally trademarks, or registered
trademarks of their respective companies. Some promotional text may be
copyrighted by the product's manufacturer.?
The Original Advantage promotional email is delivered only to customers of
PROVANTAGE Corporation. PROVANTAGE customers have purchased products in the
past and submitted their email address as part of the checkout process. Or,
customers have entered their name in the "Add to Email List" box on the
PROVANTAGE.com home page. Any customer may unsubscribe from the list at any
time by going to http://www.provantage.com/unsubscribe.htm. The email address
is permanently removed from additional promotional electronic mailings, and
will not be reactivated unless requested by the customer.??
[IMAGE]
BizRate Customer Certified (GOLD) Site
=====================================
|
4,401 |
Subject: EES Articles: USA: Calif. energy companies face San Diego lawsuit.
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4090.
=====================================
---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES on 11/30/2000
12:35 PM ---------------------------
Elizabeth Peters 11/30/2000 12:07 PM
To: Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: EES Articles: USA: Calif. energy companies face San Diego lawsuit.
Per the conference call, here is a wire article on the lawsuit for
origination. Thanks.
Beth
---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Peters/HOU/EES on 11/30/2000
12:07 PM ---------------------------
[email protected] on 11/29/2000 06:34:07 PM
Please respond to [email protected]
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: EES Articles: USA: Calif. energy companies face San Diego lawsuit.
USA:
Calif. energy companies face San Diego lawsuit.
11/29/2000
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2000.
SAN DIEGO, Nov 29 (Reuters) - A class action lawsuit filed Wednesday in San
Diego charges 14 energy companies with deliberate manipulation of prices in
California's electricity market.
The suit, filed by an anti-trust legal consortium on behalf of San Diego Gas
and Electric (SDG&E) customers, also seeks to recover at least $1 billion in
what they called overpayments to the utility, a subsidiary of Sempra Energy .
San Diego power prices nearly tripled this summer as the city's ratepayers
became the first in the state to feel the full effect of a deregulated power
market just as that market ran extremely low on power supplies.
"This is a consumer class action suit designed to get our money back,"
explained Michael Shames, head of UCAN, the Utilities Consumers Action
Network.
UCAN, though not a party to the suit, has joined a team of academics assisting
the suit's legal team as they try to prove price collusion among players in
the California energy market.
" defendants unlawfully manipulated the market for electric energy by fixing
prices and restricting supply into the markets operated by the California
Power Exchange and the California Independent System Operator," according to
the complaint.
The complaint further accuses the companies of "conspiring to illegally obtain
and trade information relating to energy supply, pricing and demand and
combining to raise the 'market clearing bid' for electric energy on the
wholesale markets."
The suit is the latest twist in a flurry of legal, legislative and regulatory
activity following a summer that saw California electricity prices soar amid
an unprecedented series of power shortages.
A growing population and strong economy have pushed power demand sharply
higher in California, while almost no new power plants have been built in the
state during the past decade.
The state's decision in 1996 to deregulate its electricity sector assumed open
competition would result in lower power bills. Instead, supplies have failed
to keep pace with demand and power prices have soared, prompting a public
outcry.
In addition to SDG&E, the suit filed today in San Diego targets companies that
sold energy to SDG&E.
Among those are Enron Energy Services, a unit of Enron Corp. , PG&E Corp unit
Pacific Gas and Electric, Duke Energy , Reliant Energy , Williams Cos Inc unit
Williams Energy Marketing and Trading and NRG Energy Inc. .
Mark Palmer, spokesman for industry giant Enron, said the lawsuit was without
merit.
"Three separate independent government regulatory agencies have investigated
these allegations and found none to be true...The problems with the California
market have to do with flawed market structure," he said.
"This lawsuit is an attempt to fix blame rather than fix the problem," Palmer
added.
The suit also charges a number of scheduling coordinators, people who schedule
the delivery of electricity over the power grid, as co-conspirators.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission earlier this month branded the
chaotic California power market "flawed" and proposed changes aimed at
restoring some stability to retail and wholesale prices. FERC commissioners
did not, however, accuse any of the market's players of collusion.
California governor Gray Davis is set to present his own list of remedies for
the state's ailing power market on Friday.
Folder Name: EES Articles
Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 81
______________________________________________________________________
To review or revise your folder, visit http://www.djinteractive.com or
contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at [email protected]
or 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
=====================================
|
4,402 |
Subject: Fall 2001 Registration UPDATES
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11022.
=====================================
Hi Evening MBA students,
For those of you who will be registering next week for Fall 2001, we have a
few updates.
1) We just added E278 Deals on WEDNESDAYS, 6:00-9:30 p.m.
This 3-unit course is expected to be very popular as it is triple-listed
with the Evening MBA Program, Day MBA Program and Boalt Hall School of
Law. Howard Shelanski from the School of Law is the instructor. CCN: #09562
This course will examine why firms engage in certain kinds of transactions
and the reasons why governance mechanisms (e.g. integration, joint venture
formation, long-term contracting, spot-market exchange) vary across
transactions. Why do firms accomplish some transactions through vertical
mergers but accomplish others through contracts? What are the attributes of
transactions and governance structures that give rise to matches between
them? What considerations give rise to whether a deal should be done and
then, if so, how it should be structured? In answering questions like those
above, this course will examine the roles that transaction costs, economic
strategy, and contract law play in influencing the nature and structure of
business transactions ranging from mergers and acquisitions to supply
contracts, patent licensing, and R&D joint ventures.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH: Professor Shelanski is a full time member of the law
faculty at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law. He received both his law
degree and his Ph.D. in economics from UC Berkeley. After graduating from
law school he served as a law clerk at federal district and circuit courts
and for Justice Antonin Scalia at the U.S. Supreme Court. Before joining
the Boalt faculty, he was an associate with the Washington, D.C. firm of
Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd & Evans. Professor Shelanski's research
focuses on industrial organization, telecommunications regulation, and
antitrust. During the 1999-2000 academic year, Professor Shelanski was on
leave to serve as Chief Economist of the Federal Communications
Commission. During the 1998-1999 academic year he served as a Senior
Economist to the President's Council of Economic Advisers.
2) E259-1 Leadership & Change CANCELLED
Due to unforeseen circumstances, Leadership & Change has been cancelled for
Fall 2001. The course may be offered again in Spring 2002 -- we'll let you
know.
3) BA215 Economics of the Nonprofit and Public Sector
OPEN TO EVENING MBA STUDENTS
Day Course (TuTh 11:00-12:30 p.m.)
Instructor: Frances Van Loo
This course explains, from an economic point of view, why all countries in
the world have not just for-profit businesses, but also governmental and
nonprofit organizations. It examines the tasks performed by governments and
how nonprofits supplement, and sometimes replace, government in
accomplishing these objectives. Because government and nonprofit
organizations differ from business in not having a profit motive, ways of
making them efficient are discussed. Examples include vouchers, contracting
out, and cost-benefit analysis. Also explored are recent developments where
alliances are formed between government and business (e.g. sports
stadiums), between the nonprofits and business (e.g.environmental
preservation), and nonprofits
and government (e.g. arts and social services). Finally funding of
governments and nonprofit organization is addressed. Examples are drawn
from a variety of fields including the arts, community economic
development, education, environment, health, international development,
religion, social services, and governmental programs in addition to those
listed above.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH: M. Frances Van Loo is an Associate Professor of
Business and Public Policy in the Haas School of Business. She established
the Program in Nonprofit and Public Management at the Haas School, 1989.
Currently, she is an Associate Editor of the Journal of Nonprofit
Management and Leadership. Honored with a campus-wide
Distinguished Teaching Award in 1985, she has also twice received the Earl
F. Cheit Distinguished Teaching Award in the School. Known nationally for
her work on nonprofit management education, she also does work in the field
of philanthropy, including teaching a course for undergraduates on the
philanthropic traditions of African-, Asian-, European-, Hispanic-, and
Native- Americans in the United States. She is a member of the American
Economic Association (AEA), the Association for Public Policy Analysis and
Management (APPAM), and the Association for Nonprofit and Voluntary
Organizations (ARNOVA), and the
International Society for Third-Sector Research (ISTR).
4) BA235 Portfolio Management (Th 2:00-4:00 p.m.) CANCELLED
Due to unforeseen circumstances, this day class has been cancelled for Fall
2001.
=====================================
|
4,403 |
Subject: 2 stories about the Drew Carey webcast
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/199.
=====================================
By , Inter@ctive Week
November 19, 1999 7:12 AM PT
This week's Webcast tied to ABC's "The Drew Carey Show" drew 1.9 million
viewers,
making it one of the largest Webcast events in Web history.
But anointing the Nov. 17 Webcast as the single largest multimedia event
online depends
mostly on how you do the counting.
The Web video -- produced by "Drew Carey" creator Bruce Helford and Warner
Bros.
Television and intended to be watched simultaneously with the on-air
broadcast of
Wednesday's "Drew Carey Show" episode -- was able to stagger its viewership
over three
separate airings of the television show in the Eastern, Mountain and Western
time zones of
the United States.
Consequently, it's difficult to make comparisons with previous Webcast
events. Online
broadcasts, such as February's online lingerie fashion show by Victoria's
Secret and
Broadcast.com that drew an estimated 1.4 million visitors, typically have
been one-shot live
events drawing all of their traffic during a single showing of the Webcast.
Figures detailing peak online viewership levels are not yet available. Warner
Bros. cobbled
together a network of online multimedia distribution companies to handle the
Nov. 17
Webcast's traffic, making it difficult to compile detailed viewership data
quickly, said Jim
Banister, executive vice president of Warner Bros. Online.
Warner Bros. contracted with a string of companies -- including Akamai
Technologies,
Enron, e-Media, Globex, iBeam Broadcasting, InterVU and Sandpiper Networks --
to carry
the Webcast feed. Because of the scattered nature of the distribution system,
it is hard to
tell how many users were blocked from accessing the video feed or to
determine how long
viewers stayed tuned in to the Webcast, Banister said.
Still, Warner Bros. officials are heartened by the early results and are
planning additional
online streaming events, including an online promotion for rock band
Metallica slated for
later this month.
"We are going to see exponential growth in the ability to do Web streaming
events,"
Banister said. "It's only going to get better and better and more refined."
11/19/1999 Daily Variety Page 6 Copyright 1999 Variety, Inc.
The first streaming Webisode of ABC laffer "The Drew Carey Show" from Warner
Bros. Online attracted nearly 2 million visits, capturing more viewers online
Wednesday night than most cable programming.
Warner Bros. Online also said Thursday it has inked a pact with actor Chris
O'Donnell to begin producing original content for its upcoming entertainment
hub Entertaindom, sometime in the next year.
While watching "Carey's" regularly scheduled TV show on ABC, Netizens also
used Microsoft's Windows Media Player to watch what happens inside Carey's
house when he's at work, including Ed McMahon failing to find Carey to hand
him a $1 million check, and dogs and ghosts throwing a bash inside the house.
Warner Bros. is using the Webcast to tease its new online streaming video
venture Entertaindom, which officially bows Nov. 29. Its event slate includes
a weeklong Netcast of the new Metallica album.
The "Drew Cam" sweeps event was exec-produced by Bruce Helford and produced
by Warner Bros. Online in association with Warner Bros. Television and
ABC.com.
Tech partners for the event included Akamai Technologies, Don Mischer
Technologies, E-Media, Enron Communications, Globix, Ibeam, InterVu,
SandPiper-Digital Island and Sonic Foundry Media Services.
"This is a television-Internet first," Warner Bros. Online exec VP Jim
Banister said. "Not only was the program entertaining and evolutionary in its
cross-media creative expression, it also gave birth to a new paradigm in how
to reach large audiences via streaming media."
Ratings for "Drew Cam" may have topped the Victoria's Secret Fashion Show and
MTV's NetAid events, which so far rank as the most watched video broadcasts
online.
Warner Bros. Online also said Thursday that O'Donnell has handed over
management of his Web fan sites to Warner Bros. home page community AcmeCity,
the latest example of an actor attempting to protect his image on the 'Net.
O'Donnell has 57,000 fansites on Yahoo! GeoCities, alone.
Warner Bros. will also help steer the official Web presence of O'Donnell's
George Street Pictures, which produced "The Bachelor" and the upcoming CBS
telepic "Miracle on the 17th Green."
O'Donnell said he will produce yet-to-be-determined programming for
Entertaindom in the coming year.
"I want to begin building a core audience of Internet-based fans today
because producing entertainment programming (online) will mean a lot more
than making movies in the future," O'Donnell said.
=====================================
|
4,404 |
Subject: Re: Follow up with Alpert's Office
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4848.
=====================================
Sandy, need to discuss this w/ you ASAP. No answer on your cell phone. Can
you please page me at 888-766-4103 or call at 713-853-5676. Thanx.
---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Letke/DUB/EES on 03/20/2001 02:46 PM
---------------------------
Enron Energy Services
From: Marty Sunde 03/20/2001 09:25 AM
Phone No: 713 853-7797 Phone
888-953-9478 SkyTel Pager
EB 889
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Follow up with Alpert's Office
Jeff and Eric,
I have NO problem trying to get letters for support of Direct Access. Eric,
if we can get those to support Jeff and Sandi, this is wonderful.
Also, I had asked Eric to check with Alpert's office to register our follow
on phone number and offer to try to correct the aggravated customers. Eric,
if you can provide a status on all of these as you make progress, that's
appreciated.
---------------------- Forwarded by Marty Sunde/HOU/EES on 03/20/2001 09:13
AM ---------------------------
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 03/19/2001 07:57 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, Heidi Messick/EFS/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: Follow up with Alpert's Office
Marty: Thanks for the information.
Getting Eric's contact information to Alpert's office is in motion.
Regarding attempt to follow-up with those who called Alpert's office to
complain, I wasn't clear on that action. Likely makes sense for Eric to
coordinate with Sandi to make the contact with Alpert's office.
Letters are an attempt to influence Alpert to 1) fix the Direct Access
prohibition and 2) ensure that DA customers don't get saddled with the DWR
costs.
Let me know if this approach works.
Best,
Jeff
Marty Sunde@EES
03/19/2001 07:02 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
cc: Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, Heidi Messick/EFS/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Follow up with Alpert's Office
All I asked Eric to do was:
ensure that there was an Enron contact if another complaint came in.
find out from Alpert's office if we could call back a few of those who called
to complain to find out what they perceived, correct the misperception,
apologize.
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 03/19/2001 04:20 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Scott Govenar <[email protected]>, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON,
[email protected], Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Janel
Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], [email protected], Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Follow up with Alpert's Office
Thanks, Scott.
Scott/Hedy/Sandi/Bev: Erik Letke heads up the retail marketing effort
underway in San Diego. Marty Sunde wants Alpert to have an EES commercial
contact that she can talk to in the event she has further questions, etc.,
He'd like Erki to be the contact person. Erik could you copy your vitals
(title, contact info) to Scott and Hedy Govenar and Sandi McCubbin so they
can forward along to Alpert?
Erik, seems that it would be useful if the customer letters to Alpert could
make the following points (folks please weigh in and add/subtract/modify if
needed):
The customer's glad to have had the option to take Direct Access service from
Enron because having the opportunity to take advantage of the offer has made
the customer better off.
Direct Access is an extremely important option that customers need, want and
should have going forward.
Any "solution" that the Legislature comes up with must therefore include the
continuation of Direct Access for all customers.
As such, the Legislature should immediately fix AB 1X to make sure that
Direct Access remains a permanent fixture of California's energy strategy.
Direct Access customers should not be forced to pay for DWR's power purchase
costs, since Direct Access customers aren't benefitting from those purchases.
Best,
Jeff
Scott Govenar <[email protected]>
03/19/2001 04:01 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Dede
As discussed, customers should send letters to Dede as follows:
The Honrable Dede Alpert
California State Senate
State Capitol, Room 5050
Sacramento, CA 95814
Interested companies should copy: "Honorable Members of the California
State Legislature" and fax or mail me a copy for further distribution.
My fax is (916) 448-0816 and my address is 1127 11th Street, Suite #400,
Sacramento, CA 95814.
Scott
=====================================
|
4,405 |
Subject: FERC Order: Neutral Implications for the IPPs; Focus on CPN, NRG
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/27927.
=====================================
A note from CSFB on implications from FERC order. No real "new" news for
sector. Indicates market had already priced the info into the stocks.
Jim
---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 06/19/2001
07:49 AM ---------------------------
From: Chip Schneider/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/19/2001 07:34 AM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael
Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: FW: FERC Order: Neutral Implications for the IPPs; Focus on CPN, NRG
and ORN
-----Original Message-----
From: "Sifert, Bryan" <[email protected]>@ENRON
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Sifert+2C+20Bryan+22+20+3Cbryan+2Esifert+40csfb+2Ecom+3E
[email protected]] On Behalf Of "Stein, Neil" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:30 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients:;@ENRON
Subject: FERC Order: Neutral Implications for the IPPs; Focus on CPN, NRG and
ORN
Good Morning,
Attached, please find our FC note on the implications of the June 18 FERC
order for the IPPs.
<<IPPupdate0601.pdf>>
Summary
1) As expected, on June 18, 2001, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) issued an order extending the scope of its California
market mitigation plan. Overall, the order was very much in-line with our
expectations.
2) Minimal Impact on Sector; Recent Valuation Compression Presents
Attractive Opportunity While we view unfavorably the imposition of any
form of price controls, we believe the expansion of the FERC's current
market mitigation plan will have a minimal impact on the Independent Power
Producers with California exposure-AES, CPN, MIR, NRG, and RRI. Our reasons
are as follows: 1) The bulk of their capacity is sold forward, making price
controls irrelevant; 2. The FERC's methodology is benign; and, 3) Valuations
already reflect political uncertainty and normalized power prices.
3) Focus on CPN, NRG and ORN In this situation we would highlight Calpine
(CPN, Strong Buy), NRG Energy (NRG, Buy) and Orion Power (ORN, Buy). CPN
has the least political risk of any of the California IPPs. NRG is the best
relative valuation play in the sector at 13.5x 2002 EPS. ORN, which owns no
assets in the West, is ideal for investors seeking to avoid any exposure to
this issue.
4) Background In its original plan, which took effect on May 29, the FERC
imposed a floating cost-based wholesale power price cap in California during
periods of stage 1, 2 and 3 emergencies. This would entail any period when
capacity reserves fall below 7.5%.
5) The June 18 order expands upon the original market mitigation plan in 2
key ways: 1) This order extends the floating price cap mechanism to the
other 10 Western states beyond California and 2) The order extends the
floating price cap mechanism to apply to all hours of the day, not simply
stage 1, 2 and 3 power emergencies.
6) Settlement Conference Scheduled for Late June The FERC also announced
that it will hold a settlement conference later this month, bringing
together the California utilities and the power generators. The goal of the
conference will be for these parties to arrive at a settlement on 2 key
issues: 1. Retroactive refunds by the generators related to past power sales
to the utilities; and, 2. Payment for past power purchases by the utilities
from the generators. Resolution of these key issues would be a major
positive and would remove a major overhang for the sector. We eagerly await
additional details on the upcoming conference.
Regards,
Neil Stein 212/325-4217
Bryan Sifert 212/325-3906
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.
If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. CREDIT SUISSE GROUP and each of its subsidiaries each reserve
the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except
where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state
them to be the views of any such entity.
Unless otherwise stated, any pricing information given in this message is
indicative only, is subject to change and does not constitute an offer to
deal at any price quoted.
Any reference to the terms of executed transactions should be treated as
preliminary only and subject to our formal written confirmation.
- IPPupdate0601.pdf
=====================================
|
4,406 |
Subject: FW: California Update 7-18-2001
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/527.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: =09Sanders, Richard B. =20
Sent:=09Thursday, July 19, 2001 9:59 AM
To:=09Sweet, Twanda
Subject:=09FW: California Update 7-18-2001
Importance:=09High
-----Original Message-----
From: =09Whitman, Britt =20
Sent:=09Wednesday, July 18, 2001 3:48 PM
To:=09Sanders, Richard B.; Edison, Andrew
Cc:=09Walsh, Kristin
Subject:=09California Update 7-18-2001
Importance:=09High
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Kristin Walsh at (71=
3) 853-9510 or G. Britt Whitman at (713) 345-4014.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
?=09Multiple MOU Plans Debated
?=09California State Budget Faces One Last Hurdle
Budget=20
There is a small possibility that Sen. Burton will not recess the Senate on=
Thursday unless the Senate passes the budget that the Assembly passed last=
night (7-17). However a key Democrat, Sen. Sheila Kuehl, has been is in It=
aly and is on a 16 hour return flight. No one knows if she has been told to=
return and without her presence, two Republican votes are still needed to =
pass any urgency measure for the budget. Kuehl's vote is crucial if they t=
ake the bill up on Thursday.=20
MOU Mayhem
There are currently three leading MOU plans being resuscitated by the Calif=
ornia House and Senate deliberations. Senator Burton is hoping to keep the=
published schedule and adjourn for a month's recess on Thursday evening. =
Speaker Hertzberg is reportedly not thrilled with leaving until the Edison =
issue is resolved. However, rumor is that whether or not they recess on Th=
ursday, their adjournment will mark the end of the Second Extraordinary ses=
sion and all XX bills passed and signed will go into effect in 90 days (al=
l others will be dead). Although Davis has stressed the urgency of passing=
a comprehensive "bail-out" plan and even threatened to call an emergency s=
ession to prevent legislators from taking a 30-day recess on Friday, there =
is no clear indication that legislators will comply with this request. =
=20
?=09Hertzberg's bill 82XX - Of the more obvious differences from Davis MOU,=
82XX proposes to offer SoCal $300 M less for its transmission lines in ad=
dition to penalizing Edison if it fails to act in good faith in closing the=
deal. It comes as no surprise that during bill deliberations, SoCal raise=
d objections to the bill and warned of impending difficulties (bankruptcy) =
for So Cal were the bill left unamended.
?=09The Wright-Richman bill 83XX - We reported last week that 83XX remains =
the only measure fueled by bipartisan support. AB 83XX was heard in an "in=
formational" hearing yesterday (7-17) and will be heard again today in the =
Assembly Energy Committee. Assemblyman Rod Wright, the Chairman of the Com=
mittee, presented AB 83xx with Dr. Keith Richman, a Republican Assemblyman =
from Southern California. They offered 83XX as an Edison bail-out, pure and=
simple. Wright was clear to distinguish his bill from 82XX, which he said =
has conservation easements and land requisitions, a renewable portfolio whi=
ch will add an additional fee on ratepayers, and reasonable review for long=
term contracts. While the chances of the Richman bill being successful app=
ear slim, reports that that Hertzberg will try to negotiate elements of his=
own bill (82XX) as amendments to the Wright/Richman measure suggest that a=
t least Hertzberg feels Richman's 83XX stands a chance.=20
?=09The Byron Sher bill, SB 78XX (Polanco) - Previously presented by Sen. P=
olanco on behalf of Governor Davis, SB 78XX has received special attention =
from Senate President, John Burton. Although it has never been heard by a =
committee, SB 78XX is currently on the Senate floor and ready for a vote. T=
he Senate Energy Committee and Senate Appropriations Committee are both sch=
eduled to have informational hearings on this bill today. Note, the meetin=
gs are informational because neither committee has possession of the bill. =
These hearings will provide information to committee members, avoid a form=
al vote, and simultaneously shield Burton/Polanco from claims that the deta=
ils of SB78XX were never released. The Senate is scheduled to be in sessio=
n tomorrow, ostensibly to vote on the state budget and SB 78XX. Given Burto=
n's penchant for wanting to keep on schedule to recess tomorrow, there is n=
o guarantee that he will hold the Senate in session once they hear SB 78XX.=
Thus, the Senate may never even see AB 82XX and AB 83XX unless either or b=
oth bills are passed out of the Assembly today and get special treatment by=
Burton to be heard tomorrow. Burton has previously adjourned the Senate to=
keep on schedule once they finish their business, even if the Assembly is =
behind them.
=====================================
|
4,407 |
Subject: RESULTS: EvMBAs' Career Ctr Priorities
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5220.
=====================================
Thank you EvMBA classmates for the enthusiastic feedback you’ve
provided regarding which initiatives the Career Center should concentrate on
with respect to your career-related needs.
The following are order ranked in decreasing order of interest:
1. Survey list of companies interested in recruiting EvMBAs
1. On-campus and company site networking events
3. Career planning/transition workshops
3. EvMBA-specific on-campus recruitment
5. EvMBAA-sponsored resume book
6. Student-to-student job fairs
7. Job performance workshops
7. Internships
Furthermore, several of you echoed what was raised during the 2/13
roundtable, that the administration should continue improving the branding of
not only the Haas MBA, but also its evening counterpart. Additionally, the
Career Center ought to schedule more weekend seminars (such as for Bear
Tracks training), perhaps a few in the South Bay or Peninsula.
That's it for now. Again thanks for your responses. I will be working w/John
and the CSOs, as well as scheduling more forums to expand on these priorities
and to develop action plans.
Thanks,
Albert
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Received: from rly-ye01.mx.aol.com (rly-ye01.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.198])
by air-ye03.mail.aol.com (v77_r1.21) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:02:05
-0500
Received: from haas.berkeley.edu (haasb.haas.berkeley.edu [128.32.67.113])
by rly-ye01.mx.aol.com (v77_r1.21) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:01:37 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by haas.berkeley.edu (8.11.2/8.11.2) id
f1FIxtM13133 for eveningmba-outgoing; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:59:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Authentication-Warning: haas.berkeley.edu: majordom set sender to
[email protected] using -f
Received: from imo-r09.mx.aol.com (imo-r09.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.9]) by
haas.berkeley.edu (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f1FIxrv13122 for
<[email protected]>; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:59:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [email protected] by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id
2.8f.6f321aa (15905) for <[email protected]>; Thu, 15 Feb 2001
13:57:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from web47.aolmail.aol.com (web47.aolmail.aol.com [205.188.161.8])
by air-id09.mx.aol.com (v77_r1.21) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:57:07 -0500
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:57:06 EST
From: [email protected]
Subject: Career Center Forum Notes
To: <[email protected]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Sender: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Hello everyone,
John Morel and I received wonderful feedback from those of you who either
attended one of the roundtable sessions or responded to me directly. Here's a
synopsis:
Overall comments
1) Continued improved branding of the Haas EvMBA through the efforts of the
Career Center personnel as well as the Haas administration
2) John has implemented a database, tracking the recruitment and career
search outcomes of evening MBA students. Of course, the database is only as
useful as the information you provide him on your job search results. So do
communicate to him relevant stats if you have recently switched jobs during
the program.
3) A few student-run organizations organize and distribute to companies their
own resume books. Hence, if you're interested in including your resume in one
or more of these books, do contact the appropriate person in these
organizations for additional info. Here's a url to assist:
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/~mbaa/officialclubs.html
4) Enhanced search capabilities (e.g., by geography and industry) for
online-listed alumni jobs as well as including a Haas alumnus (vs. HR) contact
Finally, I would like for us to prioritize for John and the CSOs those good
ideas we discussed. Therefore, from the list below, please respond with 2-4
to which you would like more efforts directed, by next Friday, 2/23. Keep in
mind that this list is not exclusive, so feel free to include your own.
- Job performance workshops
- Internships
- On-campus and company site networking events (with alumni if appropriate)
- Career planning/transition workshops (e.g., job interviewing, resume
preparation)
- EvMBA-specific on-campus recruitment (recognize there are limitations to
such an event)
- EvMBAA-sponsored resume book
- Student-to-student job fairs
- Survey list of companies (with contacts) interested in recruiting EvMBAers
As soon as I tabulate the results, I will present the findings to John and
distribute them to you.
Thanks in advance for your feedback,
Albert
[email protected]
=====================================
|
4,408 |
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/7966.
=====================================
This is very good work. You make all the points we need to make without
spraining anything in the process. You have been doing a superb job under
very difficult circumstances.
On another note: I don't know if you received my page, but the meeting with
Davis was cancelled so I flew back to Houston. We are trying to get another
time, perhaps as early as this week. Davis did meet with Greenspan and
Summers, both of whom we had briefed extensively.
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 12/27/2000 10:23 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/26/2000 07:05 PM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Eric
Letke/DUB/EES@EES, George McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer
Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
McGowan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected], Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Stuart Staley/LON/ECT@ECT, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
27th/28th
You're right, Sue. Rates can't go up w/out declaring the rate freeze over in
some fashion---trying to finesse it. Thanks very much for the comments.
Harry also had a good comment---don't specify the amount of rate increase in
our comments; rather note that the rate increase needs to be well-reasoned
and based on facts and evidence. Will make that change.
Susan J Mara
12/26/2000 06:43 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Eric
Letke/DUB/EES@EES, George McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kevin McGowan/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lisa
Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT,
[email protected], Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Stuart Staley/LON/ECT@ECT, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
27th/28th
Jeff,
This looks good. It comes across as moderate in tone-- although probably no
one else will ask to leave the rate freeze in place.
I have a legal question -- Under AB 1890, I don't see anyway that the CPUC
can raise rates without ending the rate freeze first. Am I missing
something? So, how is it clear that the CCPUC can raise the rates on Feb 1?
It's clear,however, that once the retained assets are valued that the rates
can be changed.
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/26/2000 01:15 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dennis
Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, George McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer
Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
McGowan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Stuart Staley/LON/ECT@ECT, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES,
[email protected], Robert C Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mike D
Smith/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the 27th/28th
Attached is a draft of the talking points for the Commission's hearings. Few
points:
Our time is likely to be limited to 5-10 minutes.
Mike Day, our outside counsel, will make the presentation on our behalf.
Mike Day is fleshing out the legal details of our presentation and he will
forward that along for folks review later today.
Comments can be forwarded to me via email, pager (888.916.7184), voicemail
(415.782.7822), or home (415.621.8317).
We will finalize the message points on tomorrow's daily call (10 AM CST).
The call in number is 800.713.8600. Code is 80435.
The Commission's hearings begin tomorrow at 10 AM (PST).
=====================================
|
4,409 |
Subject: Cal-ISO seeks forward contracting authority
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', "nicholas.o'[email protected]", '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2059.
=====================================
Cal-ISO seeks forward contracting authority
09/20/2000
Generation Week
(c) Copyright 2000 Pasha Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) "most reluctantly" asked
FERC last week to approve tariff amendments that would allow the system
operator to obtain forward contracts.
Further, in an effort to discourage utilities from leaning on the ISO for
power, The ISO wants to allocate the costs of those contracts to scheduling
coordinators whose forward schedules do not reflect their actual real-time
demands. The allocation of those costs would be proportional to the sizes of
the deviations. This would be a change from the current system, in which
energy purchasing to balance load is spread among all market participants.
"Fairness, as well as providing appropriate economic incentives to scheduling
coordinators to align their forward and real-time schedules, dictates this
allocation," the Cal-ISO's filing states.
Recently, Cal-ISO President and CEO Terry Winter had unsuccessfully sought
approval from the ISO Board of Governors to approve an amendment to the ISO's
tariff to require scheduling coordinators to include at least 90% of actual
loads, with generation and imports sufficient to balance their schedules, in
final day-ahead schedules, and 95% of actual load in final hour-ahead
schedules. Scheduling coordinators would have had to bear the costs of the
ISO's out-of-market power purchases to balance the load. Coordinators would
have been allocated the costs of those arrangements in proportion to the
deviations of their actual real-time loads from their scheduled loads (GW
8/30).
The ISO is asking for authority to enter into forward contracts without first
soliciting bids because a formal bid process would take too long in a
fast-moving market.
FERC has directed the ISO to enter into forward contracts as a means of
better assuring that load requirements are met. FERC expressed its concern in
an order refusing San Diego Gas & Electric's request for a cap of indefinite
duration on energy sold in the California Power Exchange. FERC ordered "the
ISO to immediately institute a more forward approach to procuring the
resources necessary to reliably operate the grid."
The ISO said it is in total agreement with FERC's observation that a
reasonable supply portfolio would make use of forward contracting as a hedge
against price volatility. The ISO noted that the grid operator and FERC are
in agreement that fulfillment of forward contracting is a responsibility that
best resides with load-serving utilities.
"Unfortunately, and for reasons not at all apparent to the ISO, the utilities
thus far have been denied that authority," the Cal-ISO filing stated, noting
the decision to empower the utilities rests California Public Utilities
Commission. The ISO said it is applying for the tools to enter into forward
contracts, but expressed hope that load-serving entities would "receive and
exercise the authority to discharge a responsibility that more properly is
theirs."
The ISO said it doesn't want to be placed in the position as a competing
market player.
"The ISO continues to believe that its market activities should be
constrained to an absolute minimum and that, most particularly, it should not
be competing against load-serving entities for the energy needed to satisfy
load that is reasonably predictable," the Cal-ISO said.
The Cal-ISO wants forward contracting authority because the grid operator
needs to buy increasing amounts of power at the last minute to balance supply
and load on the grid. The ISO has been scrambling through real-time and
ancillary services markets to find this balancing power.
Originally, the California market system was set up so that utilities would
buy most of the state's power needs through the California Power Exchange's
(Cal-PX) day-ahead market. State regulators have not given utilities
authority to do extensive forward contracting outside the Cal-PX, and
utilities have been increasingly inclined to under schedule their actual
needs in the Cal-PX and lean on the ISO to provide the balance of the power
for their customers.
Saying that underscheduling of load continues to be a problem and cautioning
that unseasonably warm days occur in the fall, the ISO asked FERC to waive
the typical 60-day notice required for tariff amendments and allow the
changes to take effect immediately.
"What the ISO seeks are the tools necessary to enable it to contract if
available forward commitments appear reasonable," the system operator's
filing says. The ISO said it does not believe other, related FERC orders
require it to forward contract.
=====================================
|
4,410 |
Subject: NEWS: price caps OK'd by FERC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11641.
=====================================
Thursday April 26 5:07 AM ET
Calif. Energy Prices Limited
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Responding to growing political pressure, federal
regulators are ordering limited price caps during California electricity
emergencies in an attempt to head off severe price spikes this summer when
the state is expected to face critical power shortages.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted 2-1 late Wednesday to regulate
prices whenever California's electricity reserves fall below 7 percent,
triggering a Stage 1 power alert.
FERC chairman Curtis Hebert, a Republican, said the order seeks to
``balance'' the need to encourage investment in power plants and boost badly
needed supply, but also protect against unreasonable prices when supplies
tighten.
California has a three-stage power alert system with Stage 1 warning of
potential supply problems and Stage 3 signaling a requirement to curtail
demand and prepare for likely rolling blackouts. California this summer is
expected to be short at least 3,000 megawatts of power even if temperatures
are normal. State officials have warned of likely frequent power disruptions.
FERC's order is aimed at preventing the most severe price spikes during those
emergency periods, the commissioners said.
Wholesale electricity prices this winter frequently have been 10 or more
times what they were a year ago with prices regularly exceeding $200 per
megawatt hour. Some futures prices for this summer delivery in the West have
been more than $400 per megawatt hour.
A megawatt is enough electricity to serve nearly 1 million homes.
In pushing through the order after a day of intense negotiation among the
three commissioners, Hebert reiterated his strong opposition to broader price
controls based solely on producers' cost of generation. Echoing the White
House, he said he continues to believe ``the best solution to California
problems are market-based solutions.''
He was joined in support of the order by commissioner Linda Breathitt, a
Democrat. She said the decision marked a breakthrough because for the first
time ``we have reached a consensus that price mitigation should occur'' in
the California market.
But another commissioner, Democrat William Massey, called the commission's
action ``paltry'' and a ``half a loaf solution'' because it is too
restrictive. He said price limits should be imposed all the time and not just
during emergency declarations.
``The evidence is persuasive that the problem (of unfair prices) exists 24
hours a day, seven days a week,'' said Massey, who for months has criticized
Hebert and Breathitt for rejecting more sweeping price controls.
He has argued the commission has failed in upholding provision of the Federal
Power Act to ensure fair and reasonable prices in wholesale electricity
markets.
The three commissioners grappled with the price cap issue all day Wednesday,
postponing a public hearing on the matter three times. Finally they emerged
Wednesday evening and approves the measure 2-1 with Massey objecting.
The commission, operating with two of its five seats vacant awaiting Senate
approve for two of President Bush's nominees, has come under intense pressure
to do something about soaring wholesale power prices throughout the West.
Earlier in the week, a group of Senate Democrats and one Republican
introduced legislation to require FERC to impose broader price caps on
electricity markets in the West and peg them to the cost of power production.
The FERC order falls short of that, focusing on California with no price
mitigation program for the Northwest where wholesale electricity costs have
been just as high as in California.
The FERC order ``ignores the Northwest, like we floated out to sea,''
complained Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., who sat in the audience during the
proceedings.
Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Wash., said he had hoped Breathitt might join Massey in
voting for broader price caps, but she did not. ``We'll still have price
gouging and blackouts,'' he said.
However, FERC did direct that an agency investigation into potential refunds
should be extended from California to other parts of the West including
Washington and Oregon. Massey maintained that investigation is far too narrow
and will be ineffective.
And even the price restrictions for California could be short lived. The
price mitigation requirements are contingent on California agreeing to submit
by July 1 a Western regional transmission organization plan, something the
state has opposed.
``The order turns into a pumpkin and will have no effect'' if California does
not join in a regional transmission organization, said Massey.
=====================================
|
4,411 |
Subject: More Likely that QFs will Get Paid Going Forward If Sign Deals with
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10244.
=====================================
PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term contracts
Greg Lucas, Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Wednesday, March 21, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/21/M
N33580.DTL
Sacramento -- Some cash-strapped producers of wind, solar and other
alternative forms of energy will get long-delayed financial relief under a
proposed order by state regulators, Gov. Gray Davis said yesterday evening.
A proposed order by the Public Utilities Commission is designed to reward
energy producers who sign long-term contracts with utilities at lower rates.
Alternative energy producers that voluntarily enter such contracts, which
would start on April 1, would be paid within 15 days, said Davis, who
requested the order. Those that do not would have to wait until the utilities
that buy their power return to solvency.
Davis blasted Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison for
not paying the alternative generators -- know as qualified facilities, or
"QFs" -- even though the companies have been collecting money through rates.
"It is wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket and withhold the
money designed to compensate the QFs," Davis said. "It's immoral and has to
stop."
Alternative producers -- ranging from massive co-generation facilities at oil
refineries to tiny biomass plants -- produce about a third of the state's
supply of electricity. But many are shutting down because utilities have not
paid them since November.
The loss of some 3,000 megawatts from tapped-out alternative energy producers
contributed to the blackouts that snarled California yesterday and Monday,
according to the Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power
grid.
The PUC's proposed order -- which will be considered at the board's Tuesday
meeting -- offers the generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contract
at $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt, Davis said.
The order does not address the more than $1 billion already owed to the more
than 600 alternative energy producers around the state. Davis said to favor
one creditor over another in past debt could bring on bankruptcy proceedings
from other creditors.
The Legislature would also need to act to make the order work.
"It is critical to keep these facilities up and online," said Sen. Debra
Bowen, D-Marina del Ray, who estimates that Edison has $1.5 billion in cash
on hand, and PG&E $2.5 billion. "The utilities owe it to the people of the
state to pay them."
Edison said yesterday that it opposed any attempt to place alternative
producers ahead of their other creditors.
But Tom Higgins, a senior vice president for Edison International, which owes
alternative producers some $835 million, said his company was talking to the
governor's office about possible payment structures.
Alternative energy producers, particularly those that use high-priced natural
gas to fire their generators, say that without an immediate infusion of cash
they must close their plants.
"We've been obsessed with the health of the utilities and (have) forgotten
the health of everyone else," said V. John White, legislative director of the
Clean Power Campaign, which lobbies for alternative energy producers.
CalEnergy Operating Corp., which operates eight geothermal plants in the
Imperial Valley producing 268 megawatt hours for Edison has sued the utility
asking to be paid and to be temporarily released from their contract with
Edison which has paid them nothing since November.
CalEnergy has a court hearing tomorrow on its Edison contract. Edison owes
the company $75 million, and the debt increases by $1 million a day.
"We've lived up to our end of the bargain but Edison hasn't. We're now not in
a position to make a property tax payment on April 10 and we're the largest
employer in the county," said Vince Signorotti, CalEnergy's property manager.
Unlike Edison, PG&E is paying its creditors 15 cents on the dollar.
"We have offered over the past five days to prepay for future power not yet
delivered to keep as many of them operating as possible, but the state needs
to decide how its going to divvy up the limited money under the frozen
rates," said John Nelson, a PG&E spokesman.
The PUC's sudden attempt to recast the rates paid to alternative generators
comes after several months of inaction, partly a result of waiting for
legislative negotiations on the issue to conclude. Those negotiations
eventually failed to move forward.
E-mail Greg Lucas at [email protected] and Lynda Gledhill at
[email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 10
=====================================
|
4,412 |
Subject: RE: Dan Walters: As California's malaise deepens, Gray Davis'
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/503.
=====================================
Hi Jeff. Good article. I sent it on to my republican friends in the west.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 10:40 AM
To: Shapiro, Richard; Kean, Steven J.; Denne, Karen; Palmer, Mark A. (PR); Steffes, James D.; Landwehr, Susan M.; Mara, Susan; Kaufman, Paul
Subject: Dan Walters: As California's malaise deepens, Gray Davis' standing plummets
Dan Walters: As California's malaise deepens, Gray Davis' standing plummets
(Published Oct. 7, 2001)
A year ago, Gray Davis was riding high -- because Californians were prosperous, confident about their future and thus supportive of the political status quo.
Davis' high approval ratings had little to do with his actual performance, or any personal affection among Californians for their cool and distant governor. He was just the fortunate beneficiary of good times and good feelings.
Today, a dark cloud has descended on the state. A sharp decline in the economy, particularly high-tech sectors, a stubborn energy crisis and, most recently, the terrorist hijackings and murderous crashes of California-bound airliners have left Californians worried about their personal safety and economic security, and they're looking for someone to blame.
Davis' approval ratings began to decline early this year as the energy crisis hit home and it became apparent that he had failed to take the initiative in heading off the worst aspects of the situation. And they have continued to sag, thus presenting the governor with a series of interlocking tests as he begins his campaign for re-election in 13 months.
The seriousness of Davis' decline was underscored late last month in a statewide Field Poll indicating that, at the moment, most California voters would prefer former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan to Davis. History indicates that Davis should still be favored to win a second term, but if Riordan does become the Republican candidate, he would have at least an outside chance of unseating Davis.
Davis' chief problem is that he will be running for re-election in what will almost certainly be sharply declining economic circumstances, the product of a slowdown already under way and the plummeting consumer confidence in the wake of the terrorist hijackings. State tax revenues are in a nosedive, running a billion dollars under projections in the first three months of the fiscal year, and Davis will be compelled to make multibillion-dollar slashes in state spending that will irritate important constituent groups.
How big the state budget hole will become is anyone's guess. There's a distinct tendency for state revenues to plummet far faster and further in an economic downturn than official forecasts, just as they rise faster and higher in a recovery than the bean counters project. Some analysts believe that Davis' problem could rival the $14 billion deficit that predecessor Pete Wilson confronted in 1991. Wilson swallowed hard and agreed to the largest state tax increase in American history.
However large the state's fiscal problem may be, it will be much, much larger if the state money Davis spent on power purchases this year cannot be recovered from a proposed bond issue. And the $12.5 billion bond issue is on indefinite hold because the Public Utilities Commission, consumer groups and Pacific Gas and Electric are opposing the administration's demand that past and future power purchases be covered by ratepayers without review.
It's apparent now that the long-term contracts the administration signed are much too expensive, which is why Davis' own appointees to the PUC are balking. Davis could try to renegotiate the contracts, but that would be admitting that he and his advisers erred in the first place. Or he could accept the Legislature's proposal, contained in legislation on his desk, that only past power purchases be guaranteed and that future contracts be subjected to the scrutiny that private utilities' purchases must receive. But Davis is insisting that he'll veto the measure.
The effect of the current flap over bonds and power contracts, as well as Davis' months-long effort to provide a bailout for financially strapped Southern California Edison, and his lackadaisical performance earlier in the energy game, will undermine the governor's claim for a second term. He comes across as someone who dithered when he should have acted, and signed too-expensive contracts even as the power market was contracting. That, and Californians' increasing apprehension about their future, will make his re-election a much dicier prospect than he had envisioned.
_____
The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.
=====================================
|
4,413 |
Subject: What's really happening in Afghanistan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/750.
=====================================
=20
October 14, 2001
Honoring the Sacrifice
By Michael Toms
=20
"We must guard against the military industrial complex"
--Dwight D. Eisenhower
1960 Farewell Address
=20
This morning I pulled up ABC News on-line, that's Australian Broadcasting, =
not American Broadcasting, and the lead story was titled, "Afghans Tell of =
Attack Horror." The story was based on the reporting of approximately twen=
ty foreign journalists who arrived in Afghanistan for the first time since =
the American-led air strikes began on Oct. 7th. These journalists saw civi=
lian casualties and talked with civilians whose villages had been bombed wi=
th estimates of the death toll ranging from 180 to 230 in one village. One=
Afghan farmer was quoted as saying, "I lost my four daughters, my son and =
my wife in this attack." Of course, the Taliban want to appeal to internat=
ional public opinion by allowing previously forbidden foreign journalists i=
nto Afghanistan. However, this does not diminish the fact that American bo=
mbing is killing innocent civilians. =20
=20
On September 11, 2001 nearly 6000 human beings sacrificed their lives. The=
se individuals were from more than eighty countries. This tragedy is not j=
ust an American event; it is a world event. Sacrifice is a noble word. It=
means to "make sacred." The deaths of more innocent civilians do not hono=
r the sacrifice that these people have made. Do not misunderstand me, I su=
pport justice being meted out to the criminals who perpetrated this horrifi=
c event. The bombing of Afghanistan is not justice. It is vengeance roote=
d in anger. As Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. reminded us before, v=
iolence begets violence; it is never the answer. When Timothy McVeigh was =
found guilty in an American court of law of blowing up the Oklahoma City Fe=
deral Office Building, he was eventually executed for his crime. We didn't=
execute his family, or his friends, or his community. That was justice wi=
thin the American system. This "war on terrorism" is not justice. Despite=
our government's attempts to propagandize this war with the assistance of =
the major mass media, we are killing innocent civilians. How are they diff=
erent from the innocents killed in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?=
At the same time more than six million Afghan civilians are starving and =
the situation is being exacerbated, because they can't get UN relief becaus=
e of the bombing. =20
=20
I am an American patriot. I love this country. I love this planet. As su=
ch, I have a responsibility as a citizen living in a democracy to speak out=
and question the decisions that are being made on my behalf by this govern=
ment using my tax dollars. The American Revolution arose from dissent and =
the desire to escape the tyranny of King George and the British Empire at t=
hat time. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill =
of Rights, are all about the sovereign voice of the people in a democracy. =
The Constitution begins with, "We the People of the United States . . ." =
The people are the sovereign voice in America. The government works for u=
s, not the other way around. We have a right to question and challenge the=
decisions of our government leaders. Indeed it is our responsibility to d=
o so. With freedom comes responsibility. I encourage you to speak out and=
express your voice, however you can; in community, meet with your friends,=
neighbors, colleagues, write letters to elected officials, call them on th=
e telephone, contact the media and tell them to report the full story of wh=
at is happening in Afghanistan. These are perilous times. The tragic even=
ts of 9/11/01 have given us an opportunity to recover our bearings, to revi=
sit the founding principles of this nation, which were inspired by the Nati=
ve peoples of this land. The Iroquois Confederacy and its democratic princ=
iples inspired Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and others. =
This is a time to recover those principles and create a world that works f=
or all. As President Lincoln so eloquently expressed at the dedication of =
the Gettysburg national cemetery, ". . . That we here highly resolve that t=
hese dead shall not have died in vain-that this nation, under God, shall ha=
ve a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people=
, for the people, shall not perish from this earth."=20
=20
Michael Toms
CEO, New Dimensions World Broadcasting Network
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
www.newdimensions.org <http://www.newdimensions.org/>
=====================================
|
4,414 |
Subject: Re:RE: Group Project
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3673.
=====================================
We can discuss and decide over the break.
Best,
Jeff
"Mark Guinney" <[email protected]>
03/14/2001 09:35 AM
To: "Vavrek; Carolyn (US - San Francisco)" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Re:RE: Group Project
Anil,
Questions for you: Is Zircom in an easily definable industry so we can make
comparable studies and valuations? Is their much public history of the firm?
Will such an acquisition have a significant influence on Intel's earnings (my
guess is no since Zircom's latest annual revenue was only $500 million versus
Intel's $20+ billion revenue)? Can we make reasonable future estimates of
Zircom's financial statements and business lines?
I, for one, have little knowledge or confidence in myself of analyzing a tech
company. Given the fact that Anil is the only person in the industry from our
group we would be heavily reliant on him to give us strategic insight on the
companies and their businesses. My preference- an industry that is relatively
more stable and simple for all of us to understand. While we don't have to do
Amazon specifically, I would like an industry or company that won't require an
immersion of readings just to understand the product, sales distribution,
clients, distributors, etc. Remember, we have to make guestimates about the
future of the industry and predict sales, costs, etc. The nice thing about
Amazon (or a similar company) is that it is merely an Internet twist on an
industry with a very long history and an easy to understand business model.
Webvan could be another example.
Another idea: Trying to value Fidelity Investments- a private company. The
nice thing about this exercise is that there is a lot of data on comparable
companies (T. Rowe Price, Zurich Scudder, Franklin Templeton) and some public
information on Fidelity. A good portion of our valuation would be based on
assumptions which means that as long as we can support our assumptions we
can't
be wrong.
**********************************************
Mark D. Guinney, CFA
Consultant
Watson Wyatt Investment Consulting
345 California Street, Ste. 1400
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 733-4487 ph.
(415) 733-4190 fax
____________________Reply Separator____________________
Subject: RE: Group Project
Author: [email protected] (Vavrek; Carolyn (US - San Francisco))
Date: 03/14/2001 1:03 PM
My vote is for analyzing the Intel purchase because we have access to some
inside info, Anil is well versed in this industry (I assume) so we could do
some good comps analysis and it seems like the right size case for us. We
could easily send Sarah the link Anil sent us and say that we are going to
analyze this acquisition. I am also open to the Amazon analysis, although I
am not as excited about analyzing such a popular issue.
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: Mark Guinney [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 5:11 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Group Project
I was just brainstorming on potential projects. I thought that an
interesting
and fairly relevant topic could be a current evaluation of Amazon.com and
how
the projected revenues & profits relate to the current stock price. We
could
also provide some historical perspective on all realistic Amazon's stock
price
was a year or two ago relative to a discounted cash flow. I can fairly
easily
get my hands on some Wall Street analyst research reports that could provide
us
with some insights and hints as to what Wall Street is expecting. Most of
our
time can be spent creating a discounted cash flow model similar to what we
have
been doing in class. Since the jury is still out on Amazon's business
model, I
think it would make for some interesting debate in class when we present our
model.
**********************************************
Mark D. Guinney, CFA
Consultant
Watson Wyatt Investment Consulting
345 California Street, Ste. 1400
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 733-4487 ph.
(415) 733-4190 fax
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.
=====================================
|
4,415 |
Subject: Angelides Now Says that Bonds Can't Be Issued Before 2002
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/275.
=====================================
See story below.
State completes history's largest municipal-bond sale
California's treasurer executed the largest single sale of municipal bonds in U.S. history Tuesday -- a $5.7 billion offering aimed at covering cash shortages linked to the state's energy crisis.
The sale -- coming in an environment of record-low interest rates -- also proved to be the cheapest such short-term financing by the state on record.
And it provided a backdrop for a warning from state Treasurer Phil Angelides that continued delay in the long-awaited $12.5 billion energy-bond sale could wreak havoc with the state's budget in the next fiscal year.
With the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks delivering a blow to an already shaky economy, there is concern that state revenues may drop even more precipitously than they have in the past year, leading to a crunch for the fiscal year that begins July 1, 2002.
The slower state revenues coupled with increased expenditures and the added burdens of the ongoing energy crisis, could force "Draconian" budget cuts, Angelides said.
"We were already facing tough budget times in 2002-2003," he said, "and that was before the tragedy of Sept. 11."
Now, if falling revenues are added to the "$6 billion hole, we'll have deficits akin to the early 1990s," Angelides said, noting the dramatic effects would be on people who depend on state services.
Earlier this year, the state advanced $6.2 billion in general-fund money to buy wholesale power for customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.
Repayment to the state general fund depends on successful sale of the $12.5 billion in energy bonds -- a transaction Angelides said requires key approvals from the state Public Utilities Commission.
The huge energy-bond sale initially was proposed for this summer and then moved to late October or early November.
But the plan before the PUC has drawn heavy opposition from state utilities.
With utilities and others threatening lawsuits at every step of the way, regulators have needed time to build a legal record for each of the seven decisions the treasurer seeks, PUC President Loretta Lynch said Tuesday.
This year, "we've been taken to court probably five times more than we've been taken to court last year," partly because the commission has been making historic decisions and partly because it's been trying to make them so fast, she said.
But Angelides said that given the delay in PUC action, he is doubtful an energy-bond sale can occur before 2002.
Besides raising the budget concerns, that also could mean that California misses an opportunity to capitalize on the very low interest rate environment.
"I do not see a way now that this bond issue can happen this year," he said, citing the minimum 60 days of public notices and appeal periods that would follow PUC action.
Tuesday's bond sale to meet the state's cash-flow needs involved what are known as revenue anticipation notes.
The notes are fixtures on California's cash-flow landscape. In 1993-94, for example, the state sold $8 billion through multiple offerings. No such sale was held last year because the state had an adequate surplus.
But a year earlier, in fiscal 1999-2000, $1 billion in notes were sold to meet cash-flow needs.
Besides being the largest municipal-bond sale on record, Tuesday's sale was also the largest muni- and corporate-bond issuance since the terrorist strikes.
Tuesday's debt issuance was viewed widely as a success because the vast majority of the securities found buyers.
"It speaks to overall quality of the state's credit and the way the state is perceived, particularly in light of Sept. 11," said Peter Taylor, senior vice president in the Los Angeles office of Lehman Bros.
As senior manager on the sale, Taylor and Lehman Bros. coordinated participation of more than 20 investment-banking firms.
"There was wide acceptance from a range of investors, retail (buyers), mom-and-pop buyers all the way to mutual funds and corporations," Taylor said.
The level of orders exceeded the offering by more than $2 billion. That allowed yields to be lowered through negotiations from the 2.25 level initially proffered to the lowest RAN on record in the state, an annualized 2.22 percent.
The notes mature June 28, 2002. Overall yield, counting the variable-rate portion of the issuance, is only 2.17 percent.
Had the $6.2 billion in general-fund money been repaid, Angelides said, the need for Tuesday's short-term debt issuance "would have been substantially less ... if not eliminated."
Even so, Angelides said the state was fortunate to "move into the market and get extraordinary interest rates, and we will be able to make it through this fiscal year."
=====================================
|
4,416 |
Subject: Re: Core/Non-Core - California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/27857.
=====================================
Jeff,
Marty Sunde asked me to get ahold of you as soon as possible to discuss
likely exit fee scenarios. Could we talk today?
Thanks,
Kevin Keeney
713-345-3724
---------------------- Forwarded by Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES on 06/15/2001 08:24
AM ---------------------------
Enron Energy Services
From: Marty Sunde 06/14/2001 08:05 PM
Phone No: 713-853-7797
To: Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: Core/Non-Core - California
Kevin,
You may want to connect with Jeff Dasovich re: his belief on the three most
likely alternatives for the exit fee issue and the probabilities of each.
Mike Day, Dasovich will have the most current info.
Lets see if we can't get this info quickly.
Thanks
---------------------- Forwarded by Marty Sunde/HOU/EES on 06/14/2001 08:04
PM ---------------------------
From: Harry Kingerski@ENRON on 06/12/2001 11:09 AM
To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
Keeney/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES,
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Core/Non-Core - California
Marty - the latest -
2 Direct Access bills (Bowen, Kelly) are still on the table. Have not
changed much since my earlier e-mail to you, except that Bowen bill now
includes a fee to the alternate provider when a customer is "involuntarily
returned" to the utility. Language is attached.
- SB 27xx - mockup.doc
Right now, this legislation is awaiting the outcome of negotiations involving
SCE and other parties (Jeff Dasovich is our rep). Speaker Hertzberg and
Senator Burton both have endorsed these negotiations and promised to support
agreements the parties reach. Jeff tells me this morning they are getting
close to agreement on core/non-core and direct access issues but there are
still major stumbling blocks, mostly surrounding the going forward DWR costs
and contracts, and the issuance of bonds to pay for them. The bond guys see
direct access as possible undermining the bonds. If or once agreement is
reached, the expectation is that enabling legislation would be crafted that
would apply California-wide.
The general structure in the SCE discussion is this -
By Jan 1, '03, 500 kW+ customers decide to go to market or stay with utility
for a long (5 yrs+) period. Re-entry from market would be with up to 12
month notice and could require customer to pay spot market price under
utility default. 20-500 kw customers would have voluntary direct access.
Under 20 kw customers would have green-only voluntary direct access.
Recovery for past undercollections is being negotiated, but will likely
require large customers (20 kw+) to pay a disproportionate share of the
costs.
This may be less than definitive, but as usual, the situation is fluid.
Marty and Jeremy, are you available for a Wednesday morning call with Jeff
Dasovich?
Also, just in case you didn't hear, the Commission is scheduled to vote on
Thursday the 14th on an order that would suspend direct access under the
AB1x. The expectation is that the vote will be delayed. Best information
says there are not enough votes to approve direct access suspension.
Marty Sunde@EES
06/12/2001 09:29 AM
To: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar
Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Core/Non-Core - California
Harry (or anyone else that might know),
Can you help me understand what has gone on in the last week re:
1) definitive view of exit fees and how they will be administered. What is
the probability of one proposed approach vs. others?
2) definitive view of core / non core decisions? when are they coming? How
might they influence our actions with the existing contracts. Probability of
one proposal passing and when?
---------------------- Forwarded by Marty Sunde/HOU/EES on 06/12/2001 09:13
AM ---------------------------
David W Delainey
06/11/2001 06:02 PM
To: Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Marcus Dotson/HOU/EES@EES, Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff
Richter/HOU/ECT, Sean A Holmes/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES,
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Core/Non-Core - California
Guys, I assume that we are managing all new and old California contracts with
this potential issue in mind. This plus the exit fees could be a significant
issue. Let me know if we need a broader discussion.
Regards
Delainey
=====================================
|
4,417 |
Subject: Fwd: APX Has New CEO -- Former CalPX CEO John Yurkanin
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3195.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/13/2001 10:50 AM -----
"Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>
02/13/2001 08:40 AM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Fwd: APX Has New CEO -- Former CalPX CEO John Yurkanin
----- Message from "Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]> on Tue, 13 Feb
2001 08:36:59 -0600 -----
To: "Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>
Subject: APX Has New CEO -- Former CalPX CEO John Yurkanin
Monday February 12, 4:07 pm Eastern Time
Press Release
Automated Power Exchange Appoints John Yurkanin New Chief Executive Officer
Former CalPX Executive Promises To Be Key Player in Global Power Arena
SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 12, 2001--Automated Power
Exchangec Inc. (APXc), a leading provider of online markets for the electric
power industry, today announced that John Yurkanin has joined APX as its new
president and chief executive officer (CEO). Yurkanin, former chief operating
officer of the California Power Exchange (CalPX), has two decades of
experience in the energy industry, including oil, gas, and electric power.
``I am very pleased to be taking the helm of APX,'' said Yurkanin. ``The APX
approach - using the Internet to foster open and neutral markets for power
trading and delivery - is just what the U.S. and international markets of
today and tomorrow need. APX has assembled an exceptionally talented group of
people who are developing the leading Internet-based marketplace for the
electric power industry.''
Yurkanin, a career energy industry executive, brings an international,
multi-commodity perspective to his new role at APX, from his past roles at
British Petroleum, Louisville Gas and Electric, and most recently CalPX. He
had served as executive vice president and chief operating officer for the
CalPX since December 1998 with responsibility for internal operations. This
included all trading operations, market services, settlement operations,
marketing, and information technology efforts.
``APX, as a provider of open markets, is an important part of the resolution
of California's volatile electricity market, as well as aiding other
deregulating markets around the globe,'' said Yurkanin. ``This is important
not only on a regional, but also on a global level, for the lessons being
learned in California will shape the course of markets around the world. In
joining APX, I am able to bring my recent public sector experience back into
the private sector, where I have spent most of my career.''
Prior to joining CalPX, Yurkanin served as Louisville Gas and Electric Energy
Corp.'s (LG&E) senior vice president for marketing and operations in its
non-regulated businesses with responsibility for operating assets associated
with the 24-hour power operations and gas control facilities. He also
directed LG&E's retail marketing, regulatory strategy, and products and
services development for emerging power and gas markets.
Yurkanin also was a principal in two energy consulting firms for two years
after his lengthy tenure with British Petroleum (BP), which extended from
1981 until 1994. At BP, he advanced through a number of positions associated
with crude oil trading, and North American and European oil and gas
marketing. From 1992 to 1994, he served as vice president for BP Gas, with
responsibilities for the start-up of U.S. commodity marketing and trading
operations to manage BP's equity production of gas and liquid hydrocarbons.
Richard Amen, who had served as APX CEO since May 2000, will resume his role
as managing partner of Venture Management Associates (VMA), which provides
investment capital and management assistance for rapidly growing technology
companies.
Yurkanin earned a master of business administration, with emphasis in finance
and management, from Xavier University of Ohio, and holds a bachelor of
science degree in chemistry from the University of Cincinnati.
About Automated Power Exchange
Automated Power Exchange operates Internet-based markets for the buying and
selling of electric power, renewable power, and related products and provides
the market and scheduling technologies needed to support power system
administration. A privately held company with approximately 100 employees,
APX has its world headquarters in Santa Clara, Calif., and its European
headquarters in London. More information is available at www.apx.com.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Contact:
APX
Lynn Fisher, 408/517-2134
[email protected]
or
Hill and Knowlton
John Grubb, 415/955-2137
=====================================
|
4,418 |
Subject: RE: California's $12.5 Bln Bond Sale May Be Salvaged, Official
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/536.
=====================================
Amusing if you're way up there in Portland....
-----Original Message-----
From: Calger, Christopher F.
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 7:37 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: California's $12.5 Bln Bond Sale May Be Salvaged, Official Says; DWR Contract Renegotiation Is Key
This is amusing.
Chris Calger
503-464-3735
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:41 PM
To: Calger, Christopher F.; Tribolet, Michael; Belden, Tim; Richter, Jeff; Parquet, David
Subject: California's $12.5 Bln Bond Sale May Be Salvaged, Official Says; DWR Contract Renegotiation Is Key
California's $12.5 Bln Bond Sale May Be Salvaged, Official Says
Sacramento, California, Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) -- California's $12.5 billion bond sale to cover energy costs may win approval if Governor Gray Davis agrees to seek revisions of existing power contracts, a state regulatory official said.
The bond sale stalled last week when the California Public Utilities Commission voted 4-1 against a plan to repay the state's power costs using utility rates. The commissioners favor another approach, opposed by Davis, that would give them more authority over the state's $43 billion of power contracts.
Some commissioners ``would probably be amenable to the rate agreement if there was movement on the governor's part to renegotiate those contracts,'' said Geoffrey Brown, who was appointed to the PUC by Davis. ``We're not just sitting around waiting for the sky to fall. There's got to be some give here.''
Moody's Investors Service on Friday said California's $31.6 billion of debt may be downgraded for the second time this year, in part because of the delayed bond sale. California's budget deficit in fiscal 2003 may reach $9.3 billion if energy costs aren't repaid, state Treasurer Philip Angelides said.
The state has spent $10.4 billion since January buying electricity on behalf of PG&E Corp. and Edison International utilities, which are insolvent.
Davis `Willing to Discuss'
``It takes two to tango and we are certainly willing to discuss the contracts,'' said Steve Maviglio, the governor's spokesman.
Davis will consider Brown's offer, ``especially in context'' of any refunds from generators that may be ordered, Maviglio said. State officials claim power generators have charged too much, and are asking federal regulators to order refunds.
Power generators are ``willing to discuss it, but I wouldn't want anybody to have any false promise or hope that any enormous change will come from this,'' said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, a group representing power sellers. Any companies willing to talk ``might want something else in return, and who knows what that might be.''
The planned bond sale, the largest municipal debt sale in U.S. history, would repay the state's general fund for a $6.1 billion power loan and cover other power costs. The sale has been delayed by the disagreements among state leaders.
`A Blank Check'
Under state law, the PUC is required to provide enough revenue from consumer rates to meet the bond payments and cover power contracts. The Department of Water Resources, the state agency buying the power, has sole authority to determine its revenue needs.
PUC President Loretta Lynch and others said an irrevocable financing order would make it difficult for the state to renegotiate power contracts. They also said the DWR has been given too much authority. In the past, the PUC has set utility rates.
``It gives a blank check to the DWR for anything that they want to do going forward,'' said California Senate President Pro Tempore John Burton.
The commissioners favor a plan to back the bonds with a surcharge on utility customers' bills. The proposal would let the PUC review the water department's revenue requirements and require a public hearing on the allocation of costs among the utilities. Davis opposes that plan.
``It's dead on arrival. It's still going to be vetoed,'' said Maviglio. The governor has until Sunday to sign or veto all the bills sent to him during the last session.
The new plan would expose the state to breach-of-contract claims, the governor's office said in a statement last week. The state agreed with power generators to pay energy contracts before repaying the bonds. Making a change now ``would eliminate the security on which the power sellers relied'' the governor's office said in the statement.
Critics of the long-term power contracts say the state's economy will be hurt by above-market costs for years to come.
No matter which approach the state takes, ``the government ought to try to renegotiate the contracts anyway,'' Burton said. ``And some of the generators have said they're willing to do it.''
=====================================
|
4,419 |
Subject: Palm Store Newsletter Vol. 1
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/230.
=====================================
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What's In Store
brought to you by InSync Online
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
September 2001 Issue
Dear Jeffrey,
Welcome to the first issue of What's In Store!
What's In Store?
It's red-hot handheld promotions and specials. Essential
software for work and play. Inspiring and entertaining
eBooks and more.
What's In Store is a special monthly newsletter for Palm
Store shoppers. So you're always up on the latest Store
happenings, including amazing deals for InSync Online
members.
What's In Store is just one aspect of Palm's exclusive
InSync Online program. To receive more of the great
handheld information Palm has to offer, take a moment
to join this free, customized email service.
You get to decide what Palm sends you. In addition to
What's In Store, you can order up info on the latest
handheld software and The Palm Voice, which covers news,
exclusive product offers, user stories and more.
To sign up for InSync Online and begin your personal
profile,
click here
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?lkRo2705ec-ZQt=170
Enjoy What's In Store. When you see something you like,
click through for details!
--The InSync Online Team
--------------------------------------------------------
PRODUCT HIGHLIGHT:
Expansive Savings!
Palm(tm) m500 Handheld at $329
Sleek, lightweight, expandable. Enter the newly priced
m500 Handheld.
Observe the oh-so-cool SD Expansion Slot that's compatible
with Palm's lineup of expansion cards.* And the software!
The Palm m500 handheld comes with tons of it-from some of
the latest business solutions to fun, challenging games.
Then there's Palm's Mobile Connectivity Kit, your easy
answer to a wireless handheld experience. It's also
included. Along with everything else you need to keep
your life running smoothly. All at a very affordable
price.
Find Out More
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?hkRo2705ec-ZRE=120
Buy Now
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?rkRo2705ec-ZQi=180
*Expansion cards sold separately.
--------------------------------------------------------
PROMOTION OF THE MONTH:
Your Palm(tm) Handheld Rocks!
The client meeting is in ten minutes. You can't get a cab
to save your life. Better put on your walking shoes.
You fire up your new Palm m105 handheld, adjust your
headphones and tap "Play." Two tunes into your personal
play list, you're in the client's lobby singing the praises
of Palm's Tunes-to-Go Bundle.
This Palm Store promotion truly rocks. Just $299 gets you
the m105 handheld and the Port?son mp3 player from Shinei,
including Liquid Player Plus software. That's $49 off the
regular price! But hurry and order, as this special bundle
disappears October 1st. Create your own play lists,
"skins" and more. A quick trip to the Palm Music Connection
yields your favorite tunes, many for as little as $.99.
Check out Palm's Tunes-To-Go promotion
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?ikRo2705ec-ZQ5=130
Palm Music Connection
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?2ERo2705ec-ZQ-=140
--------------------------------------------------------
EBOOK OF THE MONTH:
Jack: Straight from the Gut
By Jack Welch, John A. Byrne
With 20 years as CEO of General Electric, Welch is one of
the world's most admired executives. This refreshingly
honest, humorous account of the people who influenced him
and the big hits and misses of his career is destined to be
a business classic.
Read More
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?tkRo2705ec-ZQz=150
--------------------------------------------------------
SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS:
Mobile Mentor Makes the Grade
The fall semester just started and already your head's
spinning! Unless of course you've loaded Palm(tm) Mobile
Mentor on your Palm(tm) handheld.
This A+ solution will help you organize notes, assignments
and lesson plans, track grades and more. Choose from three,
extremely affordable all-in-one CDs packed with top software
solutions.
Check them out
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?wkRo2705ec-ZQo=160
--------------------------------------------------------
The content of this message is based on your personal
InSync Online profile.
To modify your profile or unsubscribe from InSync Online return
to your InSync Online profile by clicking on the link below.
Or, unsubscribe by replying to this message, with "unsubscribe"
as the subject line of the message.
(C)2001 Palm, Inc. All rights reserved.
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?rkRo2705ec-ZRm=60
Palm.com
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?7kRo2705ec-ZRb=70
Palm Store
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?zERo2705ec-ZB=0
InSync Online
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?iERo2705ec-ZRV=90
eBooks
http://insync-online.p04.com/u.d?vERo2705ec-ZRK=100
=====================================
|
4,420 |
Subject: CPUC Workshop on 4/17
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4281.
=====================================
Thank you. We look forward to a productive session on Tuesday. Have a great
holiday weekend.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Myers, Richard A." <[email protected]>@ENRON
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Myers+2C+20Richard+20A+2E+22+20+3Cram+40cpuc+2Eca+2Egov+
[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 3:42 PM
To: Fawcett, Jeffery
Subject: RE: CPUC Workshop on 4/17
Mr. Fawcett, Having your copies of your presentation available would be very
helpful and appreciated. I am expecting about 80 people to attend the
workshop. I'll put Transwestern as the first name on the "standby" list.
Richard Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Fawcett, Jeffery [mailto:[email protected] << File:
mailto:[email protected] >> ]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 1:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Scott, Susan; Dasovich, Jeff; [email protected]
Subject: CPUC Workshop on 4/17
Mr. Meyers,
I certainly understand and, unfortunately, I suspected as much. I'm
sure there are quite a few parties with keen interest in this
investigation. Because of flight schedules, the Transwestern contingent
may not be able to stay until 4:30 p.m., so I'm not sure I could even
commit to a presentation at the end of the day. We'd certainly be happy
to be squeezed in during the day if another party's presentation was
shorter than expected.
In any event, I was wondering if I might leave behind a copy of TW's
presentation for others to take home? Like I said, its chief purpose is
to introduce (or for most folks, reacquaint) Transwestern to the
stakeholders in this investigation, and to provide specific information
regarding it's capability to deliver gas to California. Would it be
possible to at least acknowledge during the day that our handouts are
available to the attendees? We could either pass them out or have them
on a table at the back. I'll wait to hear your guidance on the best way
to do this.
As I said before, Transwestern is committed to working with the CPUC to
fully develop the record and to cooperatively address any and all issues
identified in this investigation. If I can be of any further
assistance, please let me know.
Thank you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Myers, Richard A." <[email protected]>@ENRON
> [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Myers+2C+20Richard+20A+2E+22+20+3Cram+40cpuc+2Ec <<
File: mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Myers+2C+20Richard+20A+2E+22+20+3Cram+40cpuc+2Ec
>>
> [email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 11:02 AM
> To: Fawcett, Jeffery
> Subject: RE: CPUC Workshop on 4/17
>
>
> Mr. Fawcett,
> Thanks very much for your offer, but at this point I can't guarantee
> that you would be able to make a presentation. Virtually all the time
> has been now taken up by other presentations. There is an outside
> chance that you could make a 10 minute presentation, either at the
> very end of the day, or possibly squeezed in at some point during the
> day if other presentations end more quickly than expected. But I can't
> assure you that this will be possible.
> Richard Myers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fawcett, Jeffery [mailto:[email protected] << File:
mailto:[email protected] >> << File:
> mailto:[email protected] << File: mailto:[email protected]
>> >> ]
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 8:47 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Scott, Susan; Dasovich, Jeff; [email protected]
> Subject: CPUC Workshop on 4/17
> Mr. Myers,
> My name is Jeff Fawcett. I am a commercial representative of
> Transwestern Pipeline Co. and was its witness during the recent GIR
> proceedings. Given Transwestern's role as one of the principal
> suppliers of natural gas to the State of California, we are very
> interested in the outcome of these proceedings and offer our
> assistance
> to the Commission in its investigation.
> Much has been discussed in the press recently about pipeline
> infrastructure in California, as well as the upstream capacity of FERC
>
> pipes that serve the California marketplace. I know there is much to
> be
> covered in the 4/17 workshop. However, if the schedule permits,
> Transwestern would like to offer a brief overview of its delivery
> system
> to California and its view of the key issues the Commission and
> stakeholders face as the investigation moves forward. TW's
> presentation
> should take no more than 10-15 minutes.
> Please let me know if the Energy Division would like TW to make such a
>
> presentation and, if possible, approximately what point during the 9
> -4:30 session Transwestern will be invited to step forward. I'm
> available by return email or you may reach me by telephone at
> 713-853-1521. Thank you.
>
=====================================
|
4,421 |
Subject: Re: letter
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10756.
=====================================
This thing's been floating around the web for a while. Show's what's wrong
with good ol' California. To wit:
We want federal water subsidies so we can kill the fish and grow rice and
grapefruit in the desert ("and we'll keep it all for us?").
Let's drive our freakin' gas-guzzlin' SUVs all over, but hey, who needs to
invest in roads; and somebody else come quick and clean up our air from all
those emissions.
And we're 49th in the nation for spending on education. Great stuff.
Now, we've decided we want other state's with less sophisticated people (in
places like Nevada, Montana, Oregon, Washington, New Mexico) to build power
plants (and pollution) in their states to feed electricity, and dam their
rivers and kill their salmon so that we can heat our hot tubs and STILL pay 3
cents a kilowatt hour.
And oh, by the way, it's federal taxes and the military industrial complex
which has funded CA's weapons industry and communications industry. As no
big fan of the military industrial comples, I'm just crying crocodile tears.
Generally the kind of self-righteous doo-doo that turns people off to what is
an otherwise great place to be.
Yours in tender diatribes,
Jeff
PS Scott, I think that you're absolutely right: drilling in the Arctic
Refuge in good for America....
"Scott Laughlin" <[email protected]>
04/06/2001 03:12 PM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
cc:
Subject: letter
Hope this doesn't piss Jeff off too much...
America has engaged in some finger wagging lately because California
doesn't have enough electricity to meet its needs. The rest of the
country (including George W. Bush's energy secretary Spencer Abraham,
who wants Californians to suffer through blackouts as justification for
drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) seems to
be just fine with letting Californians dangle in the breeze without
enough power to meet their needs. They laugh at Californians'
frivolity.
Well, everybody. Here's how it really is: California ranks 48th in the
nation in power consumed per person. California grows more than half the
nation's fruit, nuts and vegetables. We're keeping them. We need something
to eat when the power goes out. We grow 99 percent or more of the nation's
almonds, artichokes, dates, figs, kiwi fruit, olives, persimmons,
pistachios, prunes, raisins and walnuts. Hope you won't miss them.
California is the nation's number one dairy state. We're keeping our
dairy products. We'll need plenty of fresh ones since our refrigerators
can't be relied upon. Got milk?
We Californians are gonna keep all our high-tech software in state.
Silicon Valley is ours, after all. Without enough electricity, which
you're apparently keeping for yourselves, we just plain don't have
enough software to spare.
We're keeping all our airplanes. California builds a good percentage of
the commercial airliners available to fly you people to where you want
to go. When yours wear out, you'd better hope Boeing's Washington plant
can keep you supplied. There isn't enough electricity here to allow us
to export any more planes than we need ourselves.
And while we're at it, we're keeping all our high-tech aerospace stuff,
too, like the sophisticated weapons systems that let you sleep at
night, not worried you might wake up under the rule of some foreign
kook. [As opposed to some domestic kook]
Oh, yeah, and if you want to make a long-distance call, remember where
the satellite components and tracking systems come from. Maybe you
could get back in the habit of writing letters.
Want to see a blockbuster movie this weekend? Come to California. We
make them here. Since we'll now have to make them with our own
electricity, we're keeping them. Even if we shot them somewhere else,
the labs, printing facilities, editing facilities, and sound facilities
are all here.
Want some nice domestic wine? We produce over 17 million gallons per
year. We'll need all of it to drown our sorrows when we think about the
fact that no matter how many California products we export to make the
rest of America's lives better, America can't see its way clear to help
us out with a little electricity. You can no longer have any of our
wine.
You all complain that we don't build enough power plants. Well, you
don't grow enough food, write enough software, make enough movies,
build enough airplanes and defense systems or make enough wine.
This is your last warning, America. Lighten (us) up before it's too late.
Love,
The Californians
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
=====================================
|
4,422 |
Subject: Fwd: Bush, California Gov. Davis to Meet on Power Crisis
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Aryeh Fishman" <[email protected]', 'Andrea Settanni', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2964.
=====================================
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:29:10 -0500
From: "Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]>
To: "Justin Long" <[email protected]>
Cc: "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]>, "Scott Segal" <[email protected]>
Subject: Bush, California Gov. Davis to Meet on Power Crisis
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
FYI
Wednesday May 23 4:31 PM ET
Bush, California Gov. Davis to Meet on Power Crisis
By Randall Mikkelsen
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With sparks flying between them over California's
electricity crisis, President Bush (news - web sites) and California Gov.
Gray Davis (news - web sites) agreed Wednesday to meet when the president
visits the state next week.
Davis, who requested the meeting after accusing Bush of ignoring the state's
energy woes, will renew his request that the president help give California's
consumers relief from skyrocketing electricity bills and rolling power
blackouts caused by power shortages.
``We look forward to the meeting ... where the governor will bring up the
issue of short-term price relief,'' said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio.
Details of the meeting have not been set. ``It's good news that the president
will finally discuss the issue that's on the mind of every Californian,'' he
said.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer (news - web sites) said, ``The president
has invited Gov. Davis to meet with him, to get together to talk about issues
important to California, including, of course, energy. And the president
looks forward to meeting with Gov. Davis.''
Bush, who lost the nation's most populous state by a large margin to Democrat
Al Gore (news - web sites) in last year's presidential election, is to make
his first visit as president to California next week.
Arriving late on Monday, he will visit the Camp Pendleton Marine base on
Tuesday to highlight federal efforts to cut energy consumption in California,
and speak in Los Angeles on the economy. On Wednesday, Bush is to visit the
Central Valley city of Fresno.
Davis, a Democrat, requested the meeting in a telephone call to Bush on
Tuesday and a letter dated Wednesday.
``You and I don't agree on everything. But here's something we do have in
common: we both inherited an energy mess,'' Davis' letter said. ``I look
forward to putting ideology aside and working together toward practical
solutions and an affordable, independent energy future.''
Davis has blamed a botched deregulation of wholesale electricity markets in
California and price gouging by out-of-state providers for the crisis. Davis
has accused Bush of allowing power companies, including some in Bush's home
state of Texas, to ``get away with murder'' in California.
Davis has also engaged in a bitter series of exchanges with the Republican
administration over wholesale energy price caps, which Davis says are needed
to rein in price hikes of as much as 1000 percent in power costs over the
past year.
Bush administration officials have repeatedly rejected price caps, saying
they would discourage the new investment in generating capacity that
California needs.
Maviglio noted that four California Republican congressional representatives
supported price caps.
``This is not a partisan issue,'' he said.
The political stakes for both leaders is high. A poll released Monday by the
non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California showed that a majority of
Californians disapproved of both Bush's and Davis' handling of the
electricity crisis.
The poll, conducted May 1-9, showed Davis's approval rating plunging to 46
percent from 63 percent in January.
Davis said he wanted to introduce the president to some of the Californians
who have been affected by the crisis.
``A crisis of this magnitude is an economic earthquake,'' Davis said. ``Yes,
its epicenter is California, but its widening impact will soon affect
businesses and consumers all across this country -- this is a national
economic issue.''
Davis said he agreed with Bush that long-term solutions were necessary to
resolve the nation's energy problem. But he said that California needed help
now.
``Californians can't afford to wait four or five years for a permanent
solution,'' he said. ``We need relief today.''
=====================================
|
4,423 |
Subject: Re: PUC Approves DWR Language in Decision; Removes Language Staying
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3551.
=====================================
No. The decision would have prevented the Commission from implementing the
legislation that prohibits direct access, at least during the time that
Legislature and the direct access coalition work together to try to come up
with a compromise to continue to allow direct access. So all this means is
that the prohibition still has not been implemented and there currently is
nothing before the commission to implement. Sure would have been nice if the
commission had passed it, though.
Also, did I tell you that i'm in a meeting all day tomorrow in houston and
therefore can't do an update call with edward's? i can, however, do it on
monday.
best,
jeff
William Gang@EES
03/07/2001 08:28 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: PUC Approves DWR Language in Decision; Removes Language Staying
Commission Action on Direct Access
Does this mean that the Commission has, de facto, prohibited direct access?
If so, when is it effective?
Bill
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 03/07/2001 05:07 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly
Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol
Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan
Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES,
Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas
Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES,
Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES,
Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon
Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James Wright/Western
Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy
Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy
Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES,
Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S
Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES,
Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael
Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected], Neil
Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula
Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita
Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda
Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES,
Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha
Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES,
Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran
Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, James
Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Dirk vanUlden/Western
Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, Jennifer
Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas
Condon/SFO/EES@EES, [email protected], Scott Govenar <[email protected]>,
Hedy Govenar <[email protected]> @ ENRON, [email protected], Mike D
Smith/HOU/EES@EES, John Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Janel
Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: PUC Approves DWR Language in Decision; Removes Language Staying
Commission Action on Direct Access
The Commission just voted out one half of the "Bilas Alternate."
The decision that got voted out included Bilas' DWR-based language stating
that the PUC 1) would not second-guess DWR purchases and 2) would pass
through DWR costs to customers.
However, in a move led by Commissioner Carl Wood, the decision removed the
Bilas language on Direct Access. The decision therefore did NOT include the
Bilas language staying any Commission action on implementing the Direct
Access prohibition. Carl Wood called including Direct Access "the height of
arrogance."
The decision was voted out 3-2, with the 2 remaining Republicans dissenting.
That said, the Commission has no proposal before it implementing the
prohibition, and there was no talk at the meeting of implementing the
prohibition any time soon.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
4,424 |
Subject: RE: IEP Restructuring/Transmission Task Force Meeting Scheduled for
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2907.
=====================================
* * *?As Steve mentioned,* * *
?
?For those who need to participate by teleconference the information is:
Dial in:?????????? 888.422.7105
Participant:??? 111756
??????????????????
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Kelly [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 9:17 AM
To: Steven Kelly; William Hall; Ward Scobee; Tony Wetzel; Tom Heller; Ted
Cortopassi; Steve Ponder; Steve Iliff; Roger Pelote; Robert Frees; Pete
Levitt; Paula Soos; Nam Nguyen; Milton Schultz; Marty McFadden; Ken Hoffman;
Jonathan Weisgall; Joe Ronan; Joe Greco; Jeff Dasovich; Jack Pigott; Hap
Boyd; Frank Misseldine; Ed Tomeo; Ed Maddox; Duane Nelsen; Doug Levitt; Dean
Gosselin; Curt Hatton; Cody Carter; Carolyn Baker; Bob Escalante; Bill
Woods; Bill Carlson; Eric Eisenman; Trond Aschehoug; Susan J Mara; Scott
Noll; Rob Lamkin; Randy Hickok; Lynn Lednicky; Kent Fickett; Jim Willey;
Greg Blue; Frank DeRosa; Eileen Koch; Dave Parquet; Curtis Kebler
Cc: Jan Smutny-Jones; Katie Kaplan; Andy Brown; IEPA; Bob Weisenmiller;
Karen Edson; Stephanie Newell
Subject: Re: IEP Restructuring/Transmission Task Force Meeting Scheduled for
9:30 a.m. on Friday, Nov. 3
IEP's conference facilities hold up to 18 persons.? As we do not know how
many folks are coming to the IEP Restructuring/Transmission Task Force
meeting, PLEASE RSVP TO DEBBIE CLINE AT [email protected]].? Thanks. We we get
overbooked, we will attempt to locate an alternate spot.
?
Note, the original purpose of the meeting was to develop an IEP response to
the various FERC filings on the California market structure.? Given the FERC
Nov. 1 Report, we will be focusing on responding to that Report.?? The IEP
recommendations should not change much.? IEP will be attending the Nov. 9
FERC Conference on these issues.
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Kelly
To: William Hall ; Ward Scobee ; Tony Wetzel ; Tom Heller ; Ted Cortopassi
; Steve Ponder ; Steve Iliff ; Roger Pelote ; Robert Frees ; Pete Levitt
; Paula Soos ; Nam Nguyen ; Milton Schultz ; Marty McFadden ; Ken Hoffman ;
Jonathan Weisgall ; Joe Ronan ; Joe Greco ; Jeff Dasovich ; Jack Pigott ;
Hap Boyd ; Frank Misseldine ; Ed Tomeo ; Ed Maddox ; Duane Nelsen ; Doug
Levitt ; Dean Gosselin ; Curt Hatton ; Cody Carter ; Carolyn Baker ; Bob
Escalante ; Bill Woods ; Bill Carlson ; Eric Eisenman ; Trond Aschehoug ;
Susan J Mara ; Scott Noll ; Rob Lamkin ; Randy Hickok ; Lynn Lednicky ;
Kent Fickett ; Jim Willey ; Greg Blue ; Frank DeRosa ; Eileen Koch ; Dave
Parquet ; Curtis Kebler
Cc: Jan Smutny-Jones ; Katie Kaplan ; Andy Brown ; IEPA ; Bob Weisenmiller ;
Karen Edson ; Stephanie Newell ; Steven Kelly
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 8:59 AM
Subject: IEP Restructuring/Transmission Task Force Meeting Scheduled for
9:30 a.m. on Friday, Nov. 3
IEP has scheduled a Restructuring/Transmission Task Force meeting for 9:30
a.m. on Friday, Nov. 3.? The meeting will be held here at IEP.? While we
would prefer an in-person meeting, we will also provide teleconferencing
capabilities for those who would like to participate by phone.
?
The purpose of the meeting will be to review and discuss the draft IEP
response to the various FERC filings addressing a dysfunctional market in
California and alledging generator/marketer market power abuse.? As noted in
our previous email, IEP is developing a response to these FERC filings
compatible to the work being accomplished by the Market Response Project.?
?
In addition to reviewing and discussing the draft response, we will be
discussing specific recommedations to the FERC/CPUC/EOB, etc. to improve the
functioning of the marketplace.? We will be circulating prior to the meeting
the latest thinking on this, and we expect to discuss in detail the range of
recommendations which might be inserted into the FERC response filing.? This
will be a followup to the IEP Board discussion on Wednesday at IEP's Annual
Meeting.
?
A draft agenda for the meeting is as follows:
?
9:30??? ??? Review of Regulatory Environment at FERC, EOB, CPUC
?
10:00??? ??Discussion?of FERC California Report (To Be Released on
Wednesday, November 1)
?
11:00??????Review and Discussion of IEP Draft FERC Filing (To Be Distributed
on Wed/Thursday, November 1-2)
?
12:00??????Lunch
?
1:00??????? Discussion of Specific Recommendations To FERC To Improve
Marketplace
?
3:00??? ??? End
?
?
Schedule of Upcoming Events
As an FYI, I note the following calendar events:
?
November 1??? ??? ??? ??? FERC Releases "California Report"
November 9??? ??? ??? ??? FERC Convenes Meeting/Workshop To Receive
Responses on California Report/Marketplace
November 21??????????????Parties Comments Due To FERC on California Report
=====================================
|
4,425 |
Subject: Court Gives Green Light to Green Generator To Suspend Edison
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10333.
=====================================
Court Gives Green Light to Green Generator To Suspend Edison Contract, Sell
Electricity Elsewhere
Business Wire
03/22/01, 4:43p
(Copyright , 2001, Business Wire)
EL CENTRO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 22, 2001--A California court ruled
today that a geothermal energy supplier in the Imperial Valley can
temporarily sell its electricity on the open market despite its long-term
contracts with Southern California Edison, because Edison has breached the
contract by failing to pay for any output since Nov. 1.
Cal Energy Operating Corp. operates a complex of geothermal plants near the
Salton Sea. The plants filed suit Feb. 20 in Imperial County Superior Court
seeking back payment from Edison and authorization to suspend their contracts
with Edison and sell power elsewhere in California during such time Edison is
unable to pay for power demand.
David L. Sokol, chairman of Cal Energy, said, "We applaud this short-term
solution that will provide us with a revenue lifeline and keep our clean,
renewable power flowing to Californians. It is unfortunate that it took court
action to provide us some relief from an intolerable situation."
Sokol noted that the ruling did nothing to assure that the plants collect
approximately $140 million Edison owes them for power they have produced
since Nov 1. The geothermal plants will continue to pursue legal and
legislative remedies to receive back payment, he said. "That debt will
continue to place a great strain on our operation."
He added that Edison has continued to collect tens of millions daily from
ratepayers and has amassed approximately $2 billion in cash.
On the open market, the geothermal plants will be able to receive on the spot
market higher prices than renewable generators agreed to accept in
negotiations with the state, Edison and PG&E. That lower price had been
incorporated in Senate Bill 47X, which stalled in the state legislature after
Edison withdrew its support, and has effectively been incorporated in the
California Public Utility Commission's proposed order. California taxpayers
will pay the difference, because the state is buying electricity on the open
market on behalf of Edison and PG&E.
"It is unfortunate that taxpayers will now be paying more for our
electricity," Sokol said. "That is the result of inaction by the state and
bad faith by Edison. We negotiated with the full blessing and knowledge of
the governor and the legislature to arrive at long-term pricing that would
assure reliable supply and save taxpayers billions. This pricing for our
clean, renewable energy was less than the state is paying out-of-state
fossil-fuel energy providers in long-term contracts, and less than half what
we are allowed under federal law."
Sokol added that he was encouraged by the governor's March 20 announcement
proposing legislation and action by the California Public Utility Commission
that would require Edison and PG&E to begin paying current bills for
electricity received from qualifying facilities such as CalEnergy.
But, Sokol cautioned, "While we are hopeful that this legislative and
regulatory action can move forward quickly, there are many details to be
worked out in the governor's proposal. Even with quick action, there is a
serious question whether Edison is willing to pay any of its current bills
from qualifying facilities."
He noted that, like today's court ruling, the governor's proposal provides no
plan or schedule to require Edison to pay the approximately $140 million
Edison owes for power CalEnergy has delivered to date.
CalEnergy's geothermal complex employs about 200 workers and produces a total
of 268 megawatts -- enough to supply 268,000 homes.
Geothermal plants and other generation from renewable sources provide about
12 percent of California's electricity, enough for 5 million homes.
Geothermal plants produce environmentally friendly electricity from wells
that tap superheated water 5,000 to 10,000 feet underground. Magma rising in
fissures in the earth's crust heats the water to 500-700 degrees Fahrenheit.
The generating plants convert the water to "live" steam, the pressure of
which turns turbines to produce electricity. The plants then return the
slightly cooled water to the subterranean reservoir for reheating as a
renewable resource.
CalEnergy is one of 10 members of the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee, a
group of green power suppliers who formed the committee on Feb. 15 to explore
options to collect back payments from Edison. Together, the group is owed
more than $300 million by Edison.
Note to Editors: David Sokol will discuss today's ruling in a media
teleconference at 2:30 p.m. PST today, March 22. Call 800/810-0924 and enter
code 509085. Identify the CalEnergy conference.
=====================================
|
4,426 |
Subject: Congressional Hearing Schedule/State Senate Hearing Rescheduled
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10826.
=====================================
Following is detailed information regarding the Congressional hearing=20
schedule this week.
I have just learned that the State Senate Investigative hearings originally=
=20
scheduled to begin at10am this Wednesday at the State Capitol has been=20
rescheduled for the 18th. ?
If you hear otherwise please let us know asap.
Below are:
=14 ? ?Press Release issued by House Committee outlining hearing schedule a=
nd=20
location
=14 ?? Media Advisory that outlines hearing participants
Thanks,
Jean
--=20
Jean Munoz
McNally Temple Associates, Inc.
916-447-8186
916-447-6326 (fx)
California Public Utilities Commission President to Testify Tuesday;
Press Release:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman to Testify Wednesday
Witnesses were finalized today for three Government Reform Committee hearin=
gs=20
next week on the California energy crisis:
California Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch will testify=
=20
Tuesday morning in Sacramento, where the focus will be on actions taken by=
=20
state regulators. She will be joined by the President and CEO of the=20
California Independent System Operator, Terry Winter.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Curt Hebert will testify=20
Wednesday in San Jose. He will be followed by senior officials from Pacific=
=20
Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison.
Wednesday?s hearing in San Diego will feature testimony from major wholesal=
e=20
energy producers, including Reliant Energy and Williams Energy Services.
Times and locations are listed below. For a complete witness list, please s=
ee=20
the Committee?s website: www.house.gov/reform.
Schedule:
TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2001 11 a.m. PST
Sacramento Convention Center
1400 J Street - Room #204
WEDNESDAY, April 11, 2001 9:30 a.m. PST
San Jose State University
One Washington Square in Loma Prieta Ballroom
THURSDAY, April 12, 2001 10 a.m. PST
San Diego Board of Supervisors
1600 Pacific Highway- Room #358
?
-30-
?Media Advisory:????????????????????????????????????????? Contact: Mark=20
Corallo/ Josie Duckett
April 5, 2001 ????????????????????????????????????????????? (202)225-5074
?
*** Media Advisory***
WASHINGTON, D.C. --- The House Government Reform Committee will hold three=
=20
field hearings next week in California to look into the state?s energy=20
crisis. The hearings, entitled ?Assessing the California Crisis: How Did We=
=20
Get to This Point, and Where Do We Go From Here?y will take place on April =
10=20
in Sacramento, April 11 in San Jose and April 12 in San Diego.
TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2001 11 a.m. PST
Sacramento Convention Center
1400 J Street - Room #204
Panel One
Mr. Ed Yates - Senior Vice President, California League of Food Processors
Mr. Lewis K. Uhler - President, The National Tax Limitation Committee
Mr. Pete Verboom - Glenn County Dairyman
Panel Two
Mr. Kevin Madden- General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Mrs. Loretta Lynch - President, California Public Utilities Commission
Mr. Terry M. Winter - President and Chief Executive Officer, California=20
Independent System Operator
Mr. Larry Makovich - Senior Director, Cambridge Energy Research Associates
Panel Three
The Honorable J. William MacDonald - Acting Commissioner, Bureau of=20
Reclamation
Mr. Brian Jobson - Principal Power Contract Specialist, Sacramento Municipa=
l=20
Utility District
Ms. Becky Dell Sheehan - Principal Power Contract Specialist, California Fa=
rm=20
Bureau Federation
Mr. Lewis K. Uhler - President, The National Tax Limitation Committee
WEDNESDAY, April 11, 2001 9:30 a.m. PST
San Jose State University in Loma Prieta Ballroom
One Washington Square
Panel One
The Honorable Curt Hebert - Chairman, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Panel Two
Ms. Dede Hapner - Vice President, Regulatory Relations, Pacific Gas and=20
Electric Company
Mr. Robert G. Foster - Senior Vice President of External Affairs, Southern=
=20
California Edison
Dean N. Vanech - President, Delta Power Company
Mr. Paul E. Desrochers - Director of Fuel Procurement, Thermo Ecotek
THURSDAY, April 12, 2001 10 a.m. PST
San Diego Board of Supervisors Room #358
1600 Pacific Highway
Panel One
Mr. Sam Hardage - President, Woodfin Suite Hotels, LLC
Mr. John Wiederkehr - President, Certified Metal Craft, Inc.
Mr. Douglas Barnhart - President, Dougles E. Barnhart, Inc.
Mark W. Seetin - Vice President Government Affairs, New York Mercantile=20
Exchange
Panel Two
Kevin Madden- General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Stephen L. Baum - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, Sempra Ene=
rgy
Mr. Steve Malcolm - President, Williams Energy Services
John Stout - Senior Vice President for Asset Commercialization, Reliant Ene=
rgy
?
NOTE: Witness List is subject to change
?
?
=====================================
|
4,427 |
Subject: YOU ARE INVITED: "Why are Public Schools Failing and What Can Be
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12585.
=====================================
Dear Jeff,
For decades, reformers have promised to improve the public schools,
but recent newspaper headlines show that many schools have gotten
worse:
* "Threshold lowered on exit exams -- State OKs high school
standard below what was originally proposed"
* "'Abysmal' exit test results for 9th-graders -- Most flunk if 70%
is a passing grade"
* "Small wars plague the schools -- Teachers, district, mayor embroiled"
* "Schools Add Security in Reaction to Violence"
Why have efforts to improve the public school system been such
failures? Which reforms are more likely to overcome the political
obstacles to improve education? Which reforms best ensure that
schools will be held accountable to parents? Which reform proposals
have the greatest potential for fostering educational excellence?
To explore these and related question, the Independent Policy Forum
will feature two noted education experts: Richard Vedder (author, CAN
TEACHERS OWN THEIR OWN SCHOOLS?) and John Merrifield (author, THE
SCHOOL CHOICE WARS). The program will be held the evening of
Thursday, July 5th, from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., at the Independent
Institute's conference center in Oakland, California.
For your review, I am adding below an invitation with further details
on the program. Because seating is limited, please make your
reservations as soon as possible. For further information, please
contact me or the Institute's Events Coordinator, Ms. Nichelle
Beardsley, at 510-632-1366 x118.
We hope to see you on July 5th.
Sincerely,
David J. Theroux
Founder and President
The Independent Institute
100 Swan Way
Oakland, CA 95621-1428
510-632-1366 Phone
510-568-6040 Fax
[email protected]
http://www.independent.org
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
WHY ARE THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FAILING AND WHAT CAN BE DONE? - Next
Independent Policy Forum (July 5, 2001)
American children learn less than they did 30 years ago, and even
where there are signs of improvement, they are small. Many high
school graduates -- 90 percent of whom attended government-operated
public schools -- lack the skills needed in today's
knowledge-intensive workplace. Further, many students fail to
graduate. (The dropout rate in California is 32 percent overall, and
45 percent for immigrants.) Parents and educators have long
recognized the shortcomings of the public school system, but their
efforts to reform it have failed. Are school vouchers and charter
schools the answer? What about teacher-owned schools? What other
reforms might make schools more innovative and accountable to
parents? Please join us as education experts RICHARD VEDDER and JOHN
MERRIFIELD examine new strategies for achieving educational
excellence.
SPEAKERS:
-- RICHARD VEDDER, Senior Fellow, The Independent Institute;
Professor of Economics, Ohio University; author, CAN TEACHERS OWN
THEIR OWN SCHOOLS?
-- JOHN MERRIFIELD, Senior Research Associate; The Education Policy
Institute; Professor of Economics, University of Texas, San Antonio;
author, THE SCHOOL CHOICE WARS
WHEN:
Thursday, July 5, 2001
Reception and book signing: 6:30 p.m.
Program: 7:00 - 8:30 p.m.
WHERE:
The Independent Institute Conference Center
100 Swan Way
Oakland, CA 94621-1428
For a map and directions, see
http://www.independent.org/tii/tii_info/about.html#map
TICKETS: $30.00 per person: includes one copy of Richard Vedder's
book, CAN TEACHERS OWN THEIR OWN SCHOOLS?, OR John Merrifield's book,
THE SCHOOL CHOICE WARS, OR admission without a book is $10 per person
($7 for Independent Institute Associate Members)
Praise for Richard Vedder's book, CAN TEACHERS OWN THEIR OWN SCHOOLS?
"Vedder suggests for-profit schools owned and operated by teachers
and school administrators would offer a promising alternative to the
present public school system."
-- SCHOOL REFORM NEWS
"Nobody yet has found a foolproof formula for revitalizing American
K-12 education. So let's be humble enough -- and empirical enough --
to try as many tantalizing approaches as we can. In that spirit, I
commend Richard Vedder's pioneering ideas."
-- CHESTER E. FINN, JR., former Assistant Secretary, U.S.
Department of Education
For more information about CAN TEACHERS OWN THEIR OWN SCHOOLS?
see http://independent.org/tii/catalog_pr/policy_schools.html.
Praise for John Merrifield's book, THE SCHOOL CHOICE WARS
"Professor Merrifield asks this question: what is meant by and what
is the intended consequence of reforms bearing such labels as
vouchers, school choice, charter schools, privatization, and
competition? This book brilliantly and clearly exposes the
superficiality and extraordinary fuzziness of those labels."
-- SEYMOUR B. SARASON, author, CHARTER SCHOOLS: Another Flawed
Educational Reform?
For more about this event, see
http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/010705ipf.html.
=====================================
|
4,428 |
Subject: RE: Vikram Under Fire
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/425.
=====================================
you took the words right out of my mouth...
-----Original Message-----
From: Calger, Christopher F.
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 1:11 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: Vikram Under Fire
couldn't happen to a nicer guy
Chris Calger
503-464-3735
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 9:51 AM
To: Calger, Christopher F.
Subject: Vikram Under Fire
In case you hadn't seen it, your pal Vikram's taking some pretty hard knocks right about now. Hope all is well.
Best,
Jeff
Consumer Groups, Calif PUC Question Pwr Contract Validity
LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--Two California consumer groups have asked California Attorney General Bill Lockyer to investigate whether some state electricity contracts should be nullified because of a possible conflict of interest held by one of the state's negotiations, according to a press release Monday.
The Utility Reform Network and Consumers Union asked Lockyer to examine whether income earned from energy companies by consultant Vikram Budhraja presented a conflict of interest, because he may have been involved in contract negotiations with those companies
We believe there is ample evidence for the Attorney General to investigate whether some of the state's electricity contracts were made in violation of California's conflict of interest laws," said Bill Ahern, senior policy analyst with Consumers Union West Coast Regional Office. "If the Attorney General finds that a contract was made in violation of the law, it must be set aside as void."
Three weeks after Budhraja's January hire date, Williams Companies (WMB <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=WMB>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=WMB>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=WMB>) won a $3.4 billion contract to provide power to the state over 10 1/2 years. Budhraja disclosed in mid-August that his company, the Electric Power Group, was paid more than $10,000 by Williams during the previous 12 months. Budhraja was hired by the California Department of Water Resources to negotiate power contracts, but hasn't said which generators he dealt with in the weeks before the Williams contract was signed.
"It is reasonable to assume that Budhraja may have been involved in the negotiations that led to the Williams contract," Ahern said. "It is also likely that there are more detailed records and evidence in existence, which only a subpoena or search warrant may uncover."
The groups also are concerned that Budhraja may have held a conflict of interest due to his potential involvement in negotiating a $3.9 billion contract with Allegheny Energy Inc. (AYE <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=AYE>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=AYE>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=AYE>) while he owned stocks in energy companies, according to the release.
The Attorney General's office recently said it doesn't plan to investigate conflicts of interest involving energy contract negotiations. No one at the office could be reached for comment Monday.
The California Public Utilities Commission is also petitioning federal regulators to throw out some of the state's $43 billion in long-term energy contracts, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Monday.
The CPUC has argued in filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission over the past three months that energy companies took advantage of the state's energy crisis to negotiate high-priced contracts, according to the report. The average price of power under the contracts is $69 a megawatt-hour, more than double peak electricity prices last week.
CPUC lawyers have filed challenges before the FERC on deals negotiated with Scottish Power (SPI <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=SPI>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=SPI>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=SPI>) unit PacifiCorp, Alliance Colton LLC, Sempra Energy (SRE <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=SRE>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=SRE>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=SRE>) and Calpine Corp. (CPN <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=CPN>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=CPN>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=CPN>), according to the report.
Budhraja disclosed in August that he owned as much as $10,000 in Scottish Power stock while a $1 billion long-term contract with subsidiary PacifiCorp was being hammered out. The state signed the 10-year contract July 6. Budraha sold his stock July 30. State officials say Budhraja had nothing to do with the deal, according to the report.
=====================================
|
4,429 |
Subject: Wilson says Davis ignored warnings about energy
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28966.
=====================================
Wilson says Davis ignored warnings about energy
Former governor defends himself
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Friday, July 20, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/07/20/MN187903.DTL
Former Gov. Pete Wilson, who signed the controversial 1996 energy
deregulation bill into law, blasted his successor Gray Davis yesterday for
failing to aggressively use the governor's most forceful tool -- emergency
powers -- to contain the state's energy crisis.
"There are people who have ignored the supply and tried to blame the crisis
on everyone else," the Republican former governor told nearly 100 academics
and reporters at the Public Policy Institute in San Francisco yesterday.
Arguing that Davis ignored early warnings about brewing problems and "put in
jeopardy parks, schools and other capital needs," Wilson said the Democratic
governor has skillfully engaged in finger-pointing and public relations to
blur perception of the current energy troubles.
"They've sought to blame me, and have done so with some success. . . . And
they've found a much more profitable and exciting target, President Bush,"
said Wilson, who wryly pronounced Bush's recent trip to California as "a
triumph -- for Davis."
But Davis' strategy, he said, "doesn't create one watt of new power."
Wilson's speech -- his toughest public remarks to date on the energy crisis
-- came the day the Public Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank,
released polls showing Californians now believe energy ranks far and away as
the state's most pressing problem. Many of those voters blame Wilson, not
Davis, for the power shortages and rolling blackouts, the poll shows.
The former governor's sharp words were rejected by Davis' senior political
adviser, Garry South, who said Wilson is trying to "revise history."
"If there is one shred of evidence that Pete Wilson said one thing or raised
one red flag about energy supply, let him produce it," South said yesterday.
"Pete Wilson accusing Gov. Davis of being responsible (for energy) is like
Herbert Hoover blaming FDR for the Depression. We're trying to clean up his
mess."
The GOP former two-term governor spoke on the issue of California energy as
members of the Bush administration fanned out across the nation, including a
California trip by Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, to push the White
House's energy policy.
But even the president appeared to point the finger at Wilson for some of
California's problems. "They hadn't built a power plant in 12 years" in
California, Bush told reporters Wednesday. "And guess what? When you grow
your state the way they have . . . it creates problems."
Such words chafe Wilson, who produced California Energy Commission figures
that, he said, showed that small plants were built during his administration.
In fact, he argued, the 1996 deregulation bill encouraged energy producers to
seek state approval for new plants.
While acknowledging the 1996 bill he signed was "flawed," Wilson said, "I
thought the flaws would be addressed."
"We knew it was not a perfect free market mechanism," said Wilson, adding
that he had strong reservations about the utility rate caps included in the
legislation. "(That) was a gamble, but it was one that paid off for while."
But, he insisted, the bill -- which critics say kicked off California's
energy woes -- had benefits for the state.
Wilson said it was believed deregulation would spur private industry to build
new plants that would fuel industry and "lots of jobs for Californians."
Deregulation was also seen as a means to balance power companies' concerns
about a lengthy, "nightmarish" process -- which he said dated to the early
1970s -- to build large power plants.
Davis "is now posing in front of those plants" opening because of decisions
made before he took office, Wilson noted. "I hope that he's pleased with our
handiwork."
Wilson, also lambasted Davis for failing to heed 1998 warnings from the
California Energy Commission about coming blackouts.
And, Wilson said, as the state faced rolling blackouts, job losses, and
skyrocketing energy costs, Davis failed to use one of his greatest tools in a
crisis: emergency powers.
Wilson noted that after the 1994 Northridge earthquake, estimates suggested
it would take 2 1/2 years to rebuild downed freeways and overpasses. He used
his emergency powers to offer incentives to contractors that rebuilt the
bridges within 65 days.
South, noting that Davis has used his emergency powers to deal with the
energy crisis, said there is no comparison between an earthquake and a full-
blown statewide energy crisis.
E-mail Carla Marinucci at [email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 19
=====================================
|
4,430 |
Subject: Re: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/158.
=====================================
Will do.
Drew Fossum@ENRON
09/05/2000 03:58 PM
To: Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Kathy Ringblom/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Jeff and Jeff--Pls keep me and Kathy Ringblom posted on whatever you find.
Thanks. DF
Jeffery Fawcett
09/05/2000 01:31 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Jeff,
Is it possible for TW to get a copy of the Edison filing at the CPUC? While
the article [shown below] doesn't provide any details, I suspect Edison's
complaint echoes earlier allegations against El Paso regarding their sale of
the 1.2 Bcf/d block of capacity to their affiliate. I don't think
Transwestern and/or Enron affiliate marketing companies are implicated in
this deal at all.
Can you confirm this is an "El Paso only" problem and not something Enron is
being drawn into? I really appreciate your help here.
From: Drew Fossum 09/05/2000 01:17 PM
To: Lorna Brennan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON,
Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine
Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michelle
Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee
Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria
Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Please get copies to me asap of the Edison motion and the CPUC FERC
complaint. Has someone, maybe someone at ENA, already looked at any
allegations about Enron or TW? Please forward these to Kathy Ringblom also
and I'll have her itemize any allegations we might want to repond to.
Thanks DF
ET & S Business Intelligence Department
From: Lorna Brennan on 09/05/2000 09:30 AM
To: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON,
Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine
Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michelle
Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee
Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria
Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew
Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Edison Charges Gas Market Manipulation
Southern California Edison filed a motion late last week with the California
Public Utility Commission seeking emergency relief from high spot gas prices
on which its power purchase rates are based. The company told the CPUC that
Southern California Border (Topock, AZ) prices in the last month have risen
by $2.50/MMBtu possibly because of market manipulation, in particular the
withholding off of the market of pipeline transportation capacity between the
supply basins and the California border.
"[T]here is substantial and compelling evidence that the basis differential
has been and continues to be grossly distorted by market power abuse,
collusion and affiliate self dealing of out-of-state gas suppliers and
merchants," Edison told the CPUC.
The company noted the CPUC already has filed a Section 5 complaint with FERC
regarding this issue and is seeking a recision of "certain allegedly
collusive contracts which it contends have permitted out-of-state natural gas
suppliers and their affiliates to drive up artificially California border gas
prices by wrongfully withholding capacity." It notes the complaint
"conservatively estimates that the anti-competitive manipulation of the basis
differential has already damaged California gas and electricity users by $100
million annually since the beginning of 1998."
Edison seeks an expedited order authorizing it to use the posted gas price of
$4.5133/MMBtu, which was applied to SCE's August 2000 avoided cost posting,
to calculate its payment obligations to qualified power producers for the
month of October and every month going forward. It estimated September
bidweek border prices would average $7/MMBtu. If such prices were used in
Edison's September avoided costs posting, its Transition Formula payments to
certain independent power producers will be $29 million more than the month
prior, the company told the CPUC. "No mechanism exists to recapture the
increase in such payments if it is later determined by this commission or in
another forum that the Topock border indices are unreliable at this time."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
=====================================
|
4,431 |
Subject: 529 Plans- Tips and Tolls from American Century
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1071.
=====================================
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=3774&m=100773c20ede900019537a
Schwab is pleased to provide the following information from
American Century.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Saving for college is now easier than ever through the 529
College Savings Plan, brought to you by American Century and
Schwab. With the 529 College Savings Plan your investments
accumulate tax-free, withdrawals are tax-free for qualified
expenses and the account owner retains complete control over
the plan. Now is the time to start saving for a child,
grandchild or even yourself.
How much will college cost?
This Interactive Calculator will help you to quickly estimate
the cost of a public or private education and how much you
should invest in a lump sum, annual or monthly investment to
reach your goal.
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=3777&m=100773c20ede900019537a
How do I know which college savings plan is right for me?
Our College Investing Options Comparison Chart will help you
compare the 529 College Savings Plan to other savings programs.
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=3769&m=100773c20ede900019537a
Why should I invest in the 529 College Savings Plan?
The benefits of this college savings option allows tax-deferred
investing, experienced and professional investment management
through three investment tracks plus tax and estate planning
advantages:
o You don't need a large investment to get started and
there are no age or income requirements.
o You have a choice of investment options depending on
your goals.
o Account owner retains control over the account
distributions at all times.
o Earnings on qualified withdrawals will be federal income
tax free beginning in 2002 until 2010.
o Student can attend any accredited post-secondary
institution in the U.S.
o You pay no federal gift tax on contributions up to
$50,000 in a five-year period per student ($100,000 per
couple). To qualify, you must file a gift tax return
and no additional gifts can be made to that student
during the five-year period.
http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=3767&m=100773c20ede900019537a
----------------------------------------------------------------
The 529 College Savings Plan is available through Charles
Schwab & Co., Inc., distributed by American Century Brokerage,
Inc. and managed by American Century Investment Management, Inc.
under the name Learning Quest. The Plan was created under the
provisions of Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code by the
Kansas State Legislature and is administered by Kansas State
Treasurer, Tim Shallenburger. Notice: Accounts established under
Learning Quest are domiciled at American Century and not at
Schwab. Accounts established under Learning Quest and their
earnings are neither insured nor guaranteed by the State of
Kansas, the Kansas State Treasurer, American Century or Charles
Schwab & Co., Inc.
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. Schwab is pleased to forward you this information
on behalf of the fund company.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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=3773&m=100773c20ede900019537a
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. (1201-11605)
Distribution by Quris, Inc.
=====================================
|
4,432 |
Subject: Decision to Step Down as Dean on December 31, 2001
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/279.
=====================================
August 10, 2001
Dear Students of the Haas School,
I am writing to let you know that I will be stepping down as Dean of the
Haas School as of December 31, 2001 after serving three and one-half
years. I had originally intended to remain Dean through June 30, 2001. But
rather unexpectedly, I have been offered the possibility of fulfilling a
long-held dream of spending a few years in London (where my husband spent
much of his childhood) and doing so in a way that I believe will enhance my
skills as a professor and university administrator.
During the last year or so, I explored the feasibility and desirability of
forging some kind of strategic alliance between the Haas School and the
London Business School. During my discussions and visits to London, I
became acquainted with members of the External Governing Body, the Dean's
Office and the faculty at LBS. When the LBS Dean announced in January that
he would be departing in June, the School began an intensive international
search to replace him, and my name was added to the list. During the last
few weeks, I have been offered this position. After considerable
soul-searching and family discussion, I have decided to take leave from my
faculty appointment at Berkeley to accept this offer. London is an ideal
vantage point from which to study the globalization of business, and like
the Haas School, the London Business School is one of the best in the world.
During the next five months, I will remain fully committed to all of the
exciting initiatives now under way at the Haas School, including the new
Masters in Financial Engineering program, a concurrent MBA-MFE degree
option, a new Executive MBA program that has just received University
approval and will be announced in September, the expansion of the evening
MBA program to include a "Saturday" cohort, and the development of the
Initiative in Socially Responsible Business Leadership.
In addition to these programmatic initiatives, Associate Dean Ben Hermalin
and I have formed a school-wide faculty search committee to recruit for the
ten additional faculty slots for which we have received approval this
academic year. Meetings of this committee will begin early in the fall in
order to maximize the time available for identifying and pursuing promising
candidates. I have negotiated a special agreement with the University that
grants unprecedented autonomy in faculty retention and recruitment to the
Haas School. Nonetheless, because of strong competition, the School
continues to face its greatest challenges in these areas.
Finally, there is the task of updating the core curriculum in the MBA and
Evening MBA programs. Last year the faculty agreed to give me the
discretion to make a final decision on changes to the core after reviewing
both last year's MBAA student survey on the core curriculum and proposals
from interested faculty members. I plan to make a final recommendation for
core reform in October for implementation in the 2002-2003 academic
year. Core reform will help the School deliver the very latest and the
very best in management education.
Throughout the rest of the year, I will also continue to work with the
School's talented and committed professional staff to provide outstanding
School services to faculty, alumni, donors, recruiters, university
administrators and of course students. The quality of these services is
critical to the reputation and ranking of the Haas School. I have worked
hard to attract and retain an outstanding staff and am proud of their many
accomplishments and of the cooperative management culture they have helped
to create.
I am also proud of the talented students of the Haas School. They are
bright, energetic, ambitious, entrepreneurial and caring. They work
together to foster a cooperative "team spirit," that is a rarity among
top-notch business schools. And they have created and maintained some of
the most important activities at the School like the Leading Edge, Women in
Leadership and Asian Business conferences, the Berkeley Business Plan
Competition, the National Social Venture Business Plan Competition, and
many student-initiated courses and special lectures.
To the extent that I have had some successes during my tenure as Dean, I
own them to a talented and dedicated staff, a responsive central campus
administration, a first-rate faculty, loyal alumni, and outstanding
students. Thanks for making my experience in the job so meaningful. And
thanks for your commitment to the School's wellbeing. I hope that you will
look back upon your years at Haas as among the happiest and most productive
years of your life. I know I will.
Best of luck and make sure to stay in touch with the Haas School as loyal
alumni.
Laura D. Tyson
Dean
=====================================
|
4,433 |
Subject: FW: CPUC Press Conference -- Lynch announces will vote against the
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/407.
=====================================
SUMMARY OF THE DRAFT RATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PUC AND DWR
The Bond Structure
? Keeps the state in the power selling business for 15 years - the life of
the bonds - because the bonds are repaid solely from the state's power
purchase revenues and no other repayment source.
? Designed as a "net revenue bond," meaning bondholders are paid last and
all other DWR costs and expenses are paid first. In order to sell net
revenue bonds, DWR must show that it has guaranteed revenues to both: (1)
carry out its entire operations and (2) generate enough profit to pay off
the bonds. As a result, the rating of a net revenue bond depends on the
overall financial health of the company - in this case, a guarantee that the
overall power purchase program instituted by DWR will be paid for by
ratepayers for 15 years.
? Requires that California's current energy policies and programs are set in
place and not subject to further political or policy changes for at least
the next 15 years and that the continued operation of this program will
generate enough income to meet all the program's possible financial needs
for the life of the bonds.
? Ratepayers will pay for the state's power purchase program as long as the
bonds are outstanding.
The Rate Agreement
? Requires the Commission to adjust rates in 45 to 90 days when DWR sends
over a revenue requirement. The Commission is limited only to correcting
mathematical error or costs outside the agreement's scope. If the
Commission does not adjust rates according to DWR's estimated revenue
calculations, the Bond Trustee may enforce bondholders' rights to have rates
established at a level that satisfies DWR.
? May require the Commission to require all utilities to take DWR's power
and deliver it to customers in their service territories before the
utilities sell their own, often lower cost power to customers in each
service territory.
? Precludes utilities from returning to the business of providing 100% of
their customers' electricity needs for the life of the bonds because the
state must stay in the business of buying and selling power to meet the
requirements of a net revenue bond. Guarantees DWR receives whatever
revenue it needs for all of its power programs and establishes the State in
the power business for at least 15 years, the life of the bonds.
? Because the bonds can be repaid only from DWR sales, suggests the need to
change the Legislatively imposed mandate that DWR's program "sunset" at the
end of 2002. Already, the financial community has expressed concern about
this provision. In response, DWR's comments on the Rate Agreement suggested
that an extension of the sunset by Executive Order could allow DWR to
continue purchasing power in a way that would be funded through
Commission-approved revenue requirements.
? Provides generators, who negotiated long-term contracts with the state
during the very height of the energy crisis when market power was being
exercised, irrevocable 15-year assurances that those power purchase deals
will be treated as solidly as if they were loans from the generators to the
State.
? Interferes with Federal or other court efforts to review the long-term
contracts entered into by the state. Because the existence of those
contracts is essential to the continuation of the bond deal, the state would
not be able to take advantage of any change in circumstance or law that
would reduce dependence on disadvantageous long-term contracts.
? The Commission must also enforce rules so that utilities can bill and
collect on DWR's behalf, and customers are subject to disconnection for
failure to pay for electricity provided by DWR.
? Constitutes irrevocable financing document - the Commission may not alter
or modify any of its provisions without DWR's agreement. DWR will likely
need to obtain bondholder approval before agreeing to any changes. Remains
in effect as long as the bonds are outstanding, regardless of how many bonds
are issued.
The Challenges to the Rate Agreement
? Eleven parties filed comments opposed to the Rate Agreement.
? Received comments in support only from DWR, the office of the State
Treasurer, and the investment bank underwriting the bond transaction.
? Received strong opposition citing numerous flaws with the rate agreement,
including:
o The Commission cannot make the iron-clad guarantee to meet DWR's
revenue requirement
o Unconstitutional, contrary to general principles of utilities law,
and outside the scope of AB 1X, the statute that allows DWR to buy power
o DWR has acted illegally and the Commission's actions are illegal
because they rely on allegedly improper conduct on the part of DWR
Oppose the requirement that the Commission must ensure that DWR has the
physical ability to stay in business using the utilities distribution
networks.
=====================================
|
4,434 |
Subject: LA Times Article: "Forecast Brighter but Electricity Price Soars"
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4744.
=====================================
Forecast Brighter but Electricity Price Soars
Utility: Northwest sends more power to California, but disruption from Utah
prompts Stage 2 alert.
By NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writer
Los Angeles Times - Wednesday, December 13, 2000
?????Day 9 of California's electricity emergency promised an improving supply
picture both within the state and through more imports from the Pacific
Northwest, which on Tuesday continued to dodge the expected hit from an
Arctic cold front.
?????But a disruption in supplies from Utah late in the day ended up pushing
California's power grid into a Stage 2 emergency.
?????Meanwhile, California electricity prices continued to set records, a
growing toll that consumer advocates worry will eventually come out of
customers' pockets.
?????"This is extraordinary," said Doug Heller, consumer advocate with the
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. "This is the
harbinger of a recession to come."
?????The average price of electricity sold Tuesday on the California Power
Exchange for use today was $1,182.02 per megawatt-hour. Each day since a
price cap of $250 per megawatt-hour was loosened Friday, a new record has
been reached in the state's primary market for electricity.
?????If that price were sustained for a month and consumers were no longer
protected by the current rate freeze, the average monthly residential bill
would jump to $620, Heller said. In December 1999, when wholesale prices were
about $30 per megawatt-hour, the average residential bill for a Southern
California Edison customer was $50.
?????The so-called soft price cap, which requires power generators to detail
the costs behind the price bid, is like one proposed by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, said Kellan Fluckiger, chief operating officer for the
California Independent System Operator, which balances electricity supply and
demand on the power grid serving 75% of the state. The move was intended to
keep electricity from fleeing the state for higher prices elsewhere in the
region and to help Cal-ISO run a more orderly market, he said.
?????It is too early to tell whether the first aim was successful, Fluckiger
said, but he added that the new cap has made life more predictable at
Cal-ISO, where last week dozens of operators were making frantic last-minute
calls to fill gaps in the energy supply to ward off blackouts. Those
operators now can devote more time to running the grid.
?????Electricity demand in California peaked at slightly more than 33,000
megawatts Tuesday; about 8,500 megawatts of in-state power remained
unavailable because power plants were undergoing maintenance. Electricity
reserves fell to less than 5% late in the day when some power facilities in
Utah suddenly tripped offline, cutting imports from the Southwest by 1,200
megawatts. Cal-ISO then declared its 30th Stage 2 alert of the year.
?????Customers of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power are
unaffected by the power emergencies. In fact, the city-owned utility just
brought two idled plants back online to help supply the Cal-ISO grid, selling
nearly 300 megawatts Tuesday at cost, said General Manager S. David Freeman.
?????"We're doing our best to be a good neighbor," he said.
?????Cal-ISO had hoped to avoid declaring a Stage 2 emergency, which often
requires power interruptions to some big electricity users, but a bigger
supply from the Pacific Northwest kept the more serious emergency at bay for
most of the day. The most serious of all, a Stage 3 emergency, was declared
Thursday, when the grid was within 1.5% of running out of power, but the
state narrowly averted rolling blackouts.
?????The expected Arctic cold front, which had Pacific Northwest utilities
warning of the possibility of the region's first-ever Stage 2 emergency,
"wimped out on us," said Ed Mosey, spokesman for the Bonneville Power
Administration, which markets power from several federal dams. Temperatures
were close to normal in parts of the region, and "we're at Stage Nothing
now," Mosey said.
?????The outlook improves for later in the week because some power plants
that were offline should be repaired, returning as much as 1,500 megawatts of
electricity in the state, Fluckiger of Cal-ISO said. One megawatt is enough
to power about 1,000 homes.
?????In the last few days, several power plants that had reached their
air-pollution limits, particularly in Southern California, were returned to
operation through agreements with the South Coast Air Quality Management
District.
?????As a result, Southern California has excess power, but it can't send it
to electron-starved Northern California because of constraints on the key
transmission link between the halves of the state, Fluckiger said.
?????
* * *
=====================================
|
4,435 |
Subject: Re: IEEE Standards For Interconnection
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4301.
=====================================
Tom,
I appreciate the background on issues with Peter's funding. I'll be sure not
that we do not incur any expenses as a result of any collaboration.
Catherine Dalton of AEP explained during the course of the meeting that the
AEP/APS proposal (which I will now mail to you) incorporates some features of
earlier drafts of IEEE 1547, which have been expunged in the current working
IEEE draft. I asked her to characterize what had been expunged and why, and
she only offered that sections had been eliminated in a political process,
since the draft is being finalized on the basis of consensus. This piqued my
interest, since it's very conceivable that AEP and APS have reinserted issues
that are objectionable from our point of view. Catherine Dalton made the
point in the meeting that the current IEEE draft has holes that the utilities
believe are necessary to fill.
If you have a copy of the current IEEE draft, I'd appreciate seeing it in
order to compare/contrast with the AEP/APS proposal. And as I said, I'll
mail a copy of the utility's proposal to you.
Thanks for the help!
Tom Hoatson
12/05/2000 01:41 PM
To: Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: IEEE Standards For Interconnection
First, as a "heads-up" the DPCA is somewhat in disarray after terminating the
Executive Director and resignation of the Chairman and several members (most
of it caused by retaining an attorney for the California DG proceeding
without getting authorization from the members and then scrambling to figure
out how to pay for it). Therefore, before working with Peter Chamberlain
make sure that the DPCA is funding him from dues and not an assessment that
we might end up having to pay for (I think Peter may not be retained by DPCA
since the DPCA is restructuring including looking at substantial increase in
dues). Just be very clear who is paying for Peter and understand our
financial liability before you commence any effort with him (I could be wrong
but I'd rather err on the side of conservancy).
I would be happy to take a look at what AEP/APS are proposing as long as
there's no immediate time frame. Also, I'm not sure what you mean about
earlier versions of P1547 having sections deleted. Please clarify. Thanks.
Kerry Stroup
12/05/2000 10:53 AM
To: Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom
Hoatson/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: IEEE Standards For Interconnection
DG interconnection is the subject of a concerted effort in W Va that
commenced yesterday. AEP and Allegheny have proposed interconnection
standards that allegedly are based on earlier drafts of IEEE 1547. Over the
next several weeks, we have the opportunity for input. Distributed Power
Coalition of America is aggressively involved as well, and will be advocating
its Model Standardized Interconnection Package for Distributed Generation.
Jeff and Tom, I would like to send copies of AEP's?APS's requirements for DG
connection for your review, if you are interested. Do you know why the
content of earlier versioins of 1547 has been removed (i.e., stuff that has
been reinserted in the utilities' proposals?)
I will be reviewing the materials, and have arranged with Peter Chamberlain
(representing DPCA) to work cooperatively on a response, to the extent our
interests coincide.
Janine Migden
12/01/2000 03:26 PM
To: Tom Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry
Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: IEEE Standards For Interconnection
YEs, I think so. If the Ohio utilities agree to defer to the IEEE standards
once they are approved, is that good for us? What is our view on this?
Thanks
Tom Hoatson
11/30/2000 09:58 AM
To: Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry
Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: IEEE Standards For Interconnection
I assume you are referring to the IEEE effort to develop a standard for the
interconnection of distributed resources (IEEE P1547). I was following this
development but have since reduced my efforts in this area. The status is
that they are working to get an approved standard released in the 3rd quarter
of 2001.
Janine Migden
11/29/2000 04:48 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom
Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: IEEE Standards For Interconnection
Is anyone from Enron involved in the IEEE discussions for uniform standards
for interconnection?
=====================================
|
4,436 |
Subject: Today's hearing at the CPUC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4141.
=====================================
(I feel like a reporter in a warzone)
The morning was taken up with Barbara Barkovich testifying for CLECA and
CMTA. She is a sharp witness and no one got anything off her she didn't want
to give. She gave a long prepared statement that addressed equity
considerations, conservation, and added that reliability is a key factor to
consider, and that any allocation and rate design should encourage efficieny
use of energy, should not disadvantage nay particular group
disproportionately, and should discourage use in the periods most likely to
see outages. The Top 100 hours as an allocator is equitable as it is an
allocator that both accounts for capacity and energy use. Barkovich had no
problems with SCE's billing determinants, but did have issues with PG&E's, as
she couldn't figure out the appropraite revenue requirement from their
exhibits and workpapers. She forgot to exclude CARE costs in her
calculations (everyone else did too). She noted that the classes all have
customers with wide ranges of usage, and rates should be designed to
encourage conservation. Tiering might be a way to do that, but the problem
is that the utilities have said that they can't do that right now. CLECA and
CMTA do have different approaches; CMTA wants significant rate increases in
the on-peak rates, a lesser increase for mid peak and an even lesser increase
for off-peak. They prefer a broader spreading of costs than CLECA. SInce no
one knows what the DWR contracts look like, we cannot predict what, if any,
shortfalls will occur in revenue collection. The CLECA proposal to collect
costs on peak will create the biggest bang for the buck in terms of reducing
peak usage. If usage shifts enough that the peak needs to be redefined, this
can be done in a rate case. Another problem with tiering, is that while the
utilities do have records of each customer's historic usage, that information
may not be readily available to the billing systems and may not be easy to
get at. She noted that a study is coming out tomorrow showing the impact of
rolling blackouts on Northern California businesses, and will send that
report in to the hearing examiner.
She favors an even handed approach to increasing prices, and does not want to
reallocate costs. Keep the 130% residential shortfall in the residential
class. There will be some reallocation necessary to keep ag rates from being
increased all the way. The goal is to avoid reallocation as much as
possible. Practical considerations argue against setting an arbitrary kwh
breakpoint, as some classes have a wide variety of users. Tiering should be
customer-specific and we need to find a way to do this. The variablity of
usage in the residential class is much less than other classes, and so
tiering is less of an issue. The Top 100 method allocates costs based on the
class's relative share of of peak usage during the 100 hours of highest
demand. This means both demand and usage. She agreed that DA customers
should not pay the surcharge as the power is not being purchased for them.
Shell's attorney questioned Barkovich at length about whether we shouldn't
redevelop rates here from the bottom up and only charge DA customers for T&D
and other costs properly allocated to them (nuke decommissioning, public
programs). Ms. B noted that that would mean they would not pay CTC and would
affect the PX credit.
The Street and Traffic light witness testified, and if you want to know about
the most efficient lights, call me
Kinder Morgan (our old friend Rich Kinder) which has products pipelines in
CA, testified that they want an allocation that places costs on peak power
usage, to a cap of 35 cents, and then also has a set-off to the demand charge
to reduce any overrecovery. The notion is that a customer who conserves is
still paying a demand charge for peak power not used, and this is a
disincentive to conservation.
Aglet, which is a small consumer group, testified that there is no revenue
requirement yet, since the DWR deals are secret, and so they recommend no
reallocation of shortfalls, since shortfalls can't exist. They support a
limited dollar impact until the DWR rates are known. This may drive the
revenue requirements closer to those of the Governor's. The residential 130%
shortfall and the CARE customers should be allocated to all other customers.
He also supports an equal cents per KWH charge. Increasing volatility of
prices means you cant base future rates on past costs. The world has changes
drastically since May 2000 and old data is not indicative of future. The top
100 hours is a capacity allocator, not to be used for the type of costs at
issue here.
Harry goes on either 1st or 2nd tomorrow. Also up are CIU, CEC, AReM and
possibly ORA.
=====================================
|
4,437 |
Subject: Dan Walters Defends Enron's Actions in Sacramento Bee
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/12121.
=====================================
FYI. Note toward end of story, mention of email from lawyer in class action
suit to Davis advisor asking for help in "getting information out."
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 07/24/2001 02:05 PM -----
"Ken Smith" <[email protected]>
07/24/2001 01:51 PM
Please respond to "Ken Smith"
To: "Scott Govenar" <[email protected]>, "Susan J Mara" <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, "Karen Denne" <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Dan Walters
Dan Walters: Blame game over California's energy crisis will continue for
years
(Published July 24, 2001)
The wrestling match between politicians and Enron Corp. moved into a more
intense arena over the weekend when a state Senate investigating committee
sought contempt penalties because the huge energy company has refused to turn
over internal documents.
Although Houston-based Enron owns no major power plants in California, it has
adopted the toughest stance of all energy companies against the multiple
investigations of why wholesale energy prices spiked so high. And it has
become, in turn, a whipping boy for California politicians.
At one point last spring, state Attorney General Bill Lockyer said he wanted
criminal charges against Enron and its chairman, Kenneth Lay. "I would love
to personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a
tattooed dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey,' " Lockyer said. With
less colorful language, Gov. Gray Davis has often castigated Texas-based
companies as price gougers -- even though Texas firms have been fairly minor
suppliers to California.
Some of it is just buzzword politics. Lockyer and Davis know that
Californians dislike anything associated with Texas, and Lay has been one of
President Bush's major political supporters. Enron, meanwhile, cites the
rhetoric as evidence that Lockyer, Davis and legislative investigators are
interested less in finding the truth than in seeking scapegoats. Enron also
filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the Senate's subpoenas of trading
data.
Most other energy companies have complied with the demands, creating
Sacramento repositories of the data under elaborate confidentiality
agreements worked out with the special Senate committee headed by Sen. Joseph
Dunn, D-Santa Ana. But Enron has refused, and on Saturday, Dunn submitted a
report asking the Senate for "an appropriate coercive sanction."
Does Enron have something to hide? Or does it sincerely believe that what's
happening in California is political scapegoating? Are the companies' fears
about the confidentiality of the data sought by the Senate justified? Would
data be selectively leaked to show the firms in the worst light? Would data
be used by competitors? Or could the information find its way into the hands
of class-action attorneys?
Dunn, a prominent trial attorney himself, insists that confidentiality will
be protected and that the information being sought is only for legislative
purposes. But Enron and the other companies have some reason to be wary of
turning over confidential information to politicians. Similar information was
leaked -- without penalty -- in last year's investigation of former state
Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush. And there are indications that
private lawyers are working closely with investigators.
Mike Aguirre, the San Diego attorney seeking a "smoking gun" to prove
collusion among energy companies, supplied Dunn's committee with a few
dissident Duke Energy workers who alleged, in highly publicized hearings,
that the firm had manipulated production at its San Diego plant to create
artificial shortages and drive up spot market power prices. Duke then refuted
the charges by releasing some excerpts from the records of the Independent
System Operator, the controller of California's power grid, indicating that
ISO had ordered the plant operational changes.
Aguirre subsequently asked the governor's office to pressure the ISO -- now
under Davis' direct control -- to release all of the Duke-related documents
that would show, he says, that the firm actually manipulated the situation.
Duke and other companies insist that the ISO-held documents are proprietary.
Aguirre pleaded with one Davis adviser in an e-mail that "we need your help
in properly getting this information out." But Aguirre, in an interview, said
he had not yet obtained cooperation from Davis aides.
The political and legal struggle to affix blame for California's energy woes
will continue for months, perhaps years. The crisis will cost ratepayers at
least $50 billion, and they'll want to know why as they make out their
utility bill checks.
The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or [email protected]
.
=====================================
|
4,438 |
Subject: Municipal utilities lambaste Davis threat to seize power
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13310.
=====================================
Municipal utilities lambaste Davis threat to seize power
David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, June 1, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/06/01/MN17670.DTL
California municipal utilities reacted with shock and anger yesterday to Gov.
Gray Davis' threat to seize their excess power if they did not slash prices
to below-market rates.
"I feel totally betrayed," said George Fraser, general manager of the
Northern California Power Agency, an association of 14 municipal utilities.
"It's clear to me that the governor doesn't understand the power business."
This new dimension to the state's energy woes came as authorities issued
their first one-hour warning of imminent blackouts in the Bay Area, only to
cancel the warning an hour later when additional power supplies were found.
Davis told The Chronicle in an interview Wednesday that some city-owned
municipal utilities had charged even higher electricity prices than the
out-of- state generators he has accused of gouging California consumers.
He said he was prepared to use his executive authority "to get that power one
way or another" if the utilities did not lower their prices. The state so far
has spent more than $8 billion buying electricity on behalf of cash- strapped
Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison.
"What the governor said makes no sense whatsoever," said Jerry Jordan,
executive director of the California Municipal Utilities Association. "He was
definitely off-base."
Jordan said most municipal utilities already provided all surplus power to
California's electricity market.
However, he said, the municipals buy power at market rates to meet their own
shortfalls, and thus have a responsibility to their customers -- local city
residents -- to sell any excess supplies at the same sky-high price levels.
"Our utilities are going to do what they can to help the state of
California," Jordan said. "But they aren't going to do that at the expense of
customers."
Davis' threat followed a meeting last week with the heads of about a dozen
municipal utilities. Participants said the tone of the discussion was
generally cordial, and it was understood the governor's office would work up
a plan for future electricity purchases.
Davis' threat came out of the blue, they said.
"We're willing to sell our excess power," said John Roukema, assistant
director of Silicon Valley Power in Santa Clara. "But we have to deal with
the same market conditions that the governor does."
Davis doesn't see it that way. He believes that many municipal utilities are
exploiting California's power shortage in the same way that out-of-state
generators are walking off with billions of dollars in windfall profits.
The governor's top energy adviser, S. David Freeman, said in an interview
yesterday that Davis' threat to seize the municipals' power was intended as a
reminder that the state expected prompt action on the issue.
"We want to be sure that the municipals are not just talking the talk but
doing what they say," Freeman said.
He said municipal utilities should be selling surplus power at the same level
it cost to generate electricity, plus a reasonable markup of about 15
percent.
Freeman finds himself in a somewhat awkward position on the matter. Before
signing on with the Davis administration, he was head of the Los Angeles
Department of Water and Power, by far the state's largest municipal utility.
The Los Angeles department has been accused by both federal and state
officials of charging some of the highest prices of all for electricity.
Earlier this year, it was asking as much as $1,400 per megawatt hour for its
output.
Frank Salas, the department's chief operating officer, said such prices were
necessitated by high production expenses. "We were just recovering our
costs," he said.
For his part, Freeman insisted that no such pricing had occurred on his
watch.
"There was tremendous pressure on me to charge more," he said of urgings from
Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan and other local officials for higher
profits, demands that Freeman said he had resisted.
"That pressure may have increased now that I'm gone," he said. "I don't know
what they're doing now."
The Department of Water and Power's Salas countered that Freeman should know
exactly what his former colleagues were doing. "We have the same pricing
structure now that we had when he was boss," he said.
Fraser at the Northern California Power Agency said it was strange that Davis
would be so aggressive in his dealings with the municipals, which provide
only about 15 percent of the state's power needs.
"He's kicking the little guy," he said. "He's picking on us because he can."
E-mail David Lazarus at [email protected].
=====================================
|
4,439 |
Subject: AB1890 says DA customers cannot pay more as follows:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '=20', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4065.
=====================================
(a) The cost recovery plan shall set rates for each customer class,rate=20
schedule, contract, or tariff option, at levels equal to the level as
shown on electric rate schedules as of June 10, 1996, provided that rates f=
or=20
residential and small commercial customers shall be
reduced so that these customers shall receive rate reductions of no less th=
an=20
10 percent for 1998 continuing through 2002. These rate levels for each=20
customer class, rate schedule, contract, or tariff option shall remain in=
=20
effect until the earlier of March 31, 2002, or the date on which the=20
commission-authorized costs for utility generation-related assets and=20
obligations have been fully recovered.
Also supports that DA customers should not pay more than frozen rates
---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Stoness/HOU/EES on 04/23/2001 07:=
04=20
PM ---------------------------
Scott Stoness
04/23/2001 07:00 PM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],=
=20
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],=20
[email protected], James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: =20
Subject: AB1890 says DA customers cannot pay more as follows:
The following 4 excerpts from AB1890 make a pretty compelling case that:
1) The DA customers should not pay more than bundled rates and
2) This should be accomplised through forcing utilties to participate in th=
e=20
Px
3) Px should reflect market value
367 e 2, page 33 says=20
"(2) Individual customers shall not experience rate increases as a result o=
f=20
the allocation of transition costs. However, customers who elect to purchas=
e=20
energy from suppliers other than the Power Exchange through a direct=20
transaction, may incur increases in the total price they pay for electricit=
y=20
to the extent the price for the
energy exceeds the Power Exchange price."
Says that DA customers cannot pay more than bundled if they buy from=20
supplier at market prices.
365. confirms that the legislation intended that the utility be forced to=
=20
sell to the Px as follows:
"The actions of the commission pursuant to this chapter shallbe consistent=
=20
with the findings and declarations contained in Section330. In addition, th=
e=20
commission
shall do all of the following:
(a) Facilitate the efforts of the state=01,s electrical corporations to dev=
elop=20
and obtain authorization from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for=
=20
the creation and operation of an Independent System Operator and an=20
independent Power Exchange, for the determination of which transmission and
distribution facilities are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the=20
commission, and for approval, to the extent necessary, of the cost
recovery mechanism established as provided in Sections 367 to 376, inclusiv=
e.=20
The commission shall also participate fully in all proceedings before the=
=20
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in connection with the Independent=20
System Operator and the independent Power Exchange, and shall encourage the=
=20
Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission to adopt protocols and procedures that=20
strengthen the reliability of the interconnected transmission
grid, encourage all publicly owned utilities in California to become full=
=20
participants, and maximize enforceability of such protocols and procedures =
by=20
all market participants.
Says they intend that utilities buy and sell from the Px
390 c page 49 confirms that Px is market based as follows:=20
"(c) The short-run avoided cost energy payments paid to nonutility power=20
generators by electrical corporations shall be based on the
clearing price paid by the independent Power Exchange....."
Confirms that they intended that Px be short run avoided costs or market=
=20
value
367 (c) page 33 confirms that Px is market based as follows: " Be limited i=
n=20
the case of utility-owned fossil generation to the uneconomic portion of th=
e=20
net book value of the fossil capital investment existing as of January 1,=
=20
1998, and appropriate costs incurred after December 20, 1995, for capital=
=20
additions to generating
facilities existing as of December 20, 1995, that the commission determines=
=20
are reasonable and should be recovered, provided that
the additions are necessary to maintain such facilities through December 31=
,=20
2001. All =01+=01+going forward costs=01,=01, of fossil plant operation,
including operation and maintenance, administrative and general, fuel and=
=20
fuel transportation costs, shall be recovered solely from
independent Power Exchange Revenues or from contracts with the Independent=
=20
System Operator, provided that for the purposes of this
chapter, the following costs may be recoverable pursuant to this section:"
Supports that the legislation intended utility generation to be sold to Px
=====================================
|
4,440 |
Subject: Proposed Answer of CMUA's Complaint
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Christi Nicolay', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]=20', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2480.
=====================================
Sorry about the Greek in the first paragraph of my last E-mail. I still=20
can't figure out how I did that. All I said was, as you know, CMUA filed a=
=20
complaint with FERC asking for cost-based rates and introducing an outline =
of=20
an answer to the legal issues. =20
Under the FERC rules, we are required to file an answer to the complaint. =
I=20
have also asked Seabron for an estimate for answering the economics=20
assertions raised in CMUA and PG&E's filings.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 10/18/2000 11:18 A=
M=20
---------------------------
Mary Hain
10/18/2000 10:37 AM
To: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected], Richard Sanders,=
=20
Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona Petrochko, [email protected], Paul=20
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Sar=
ah=20
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D=20
Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides, Tim=20
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Richter/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Christi Nicolay, [email protected]=20
Subject: Proposed Answer of CMUA's Complaint
As you have already heard, California Municipal Utilities Association filed=
a=20
complaint with FERC asking for cost based rates. The following is a brief=
=20
outline of an EPMI/EES answer to the complaint. The answer is due Friday. =
=20
Please send me any comments ASAP.=20
? The complaint should be rejected because it wrongly assumes that the=20
Commission has no option to ensure just and reasonable rates but to require=
=20
cost based rates because there is no low cost solution to the problems=20
currently faced by the California markets. We should attach our white pape=
r=20
to our protest and state that the paper explains how these problems could b=
e=20
solved at little or no cost to the customers. =20
? I list here, for your information, the reasons CMUA claims that markets a=
re=20
not competitive (these reasons will not be re-listed in the pleading).=20
? 2000 prices greatly exceeded 1999 prices without regard to load.
? zonal constrained prices, even in the off-peak hours, do not reflect=20
competitive outcomes for low load conditions. =20
? even small players can be price setters
? The changes required are additional generation, transmission, and demand=
=20
response and will cost tens of millions of dollars and take lengthy periods=
=20
of time to implement.
? There is no evidence that markets will ensure just and reasonable rates i=
n=20
the near future.
? CMUA asserts that with the advent of electric restructuring, the Commissi=
on=20
has increasingly allowed energy and ancillary services to be sold at=20
market-based rates. However, CMUA is wrong in the context of the West wher=
e=20
there has been market-based trading of electricity before electric=20
restructuring, since the FERC approved the Western Systems Power Pool=01,s=
=20
contract in 1991. The Commission=01,s rules didn=01,t create the wholesale=
market=20
in the past, the market did and it was running fine until it was messed up =
by=20
certain market rules were imposed that are enumerated in our paper. The=20
problem is not the market-based rates. The problem is the market rules.
? CMUA=01,s motion does not address how market-based rates would be calcula=
ted=20
for marketers that do not sell power from their own resources, let alone=20
reflect the trading of basis points. Almost all of the power EPMI sells is=
=20
power it has bought from some other marketer or generator. Many of EPMI=01=
,s=20
deals are done through brokers such that EPMI does not find out the identit=
y=20
of the seller until after a deal has been struck. Accordingly, EPMI gets n=
o=20
information about the cost of the underlying generation.=20
? If FERC doesn=01,t try to fix the market but simply takes away our=20
market-based rates, since there=01,s is no basis for us to set cost based r=
ates,=20
we would go out of business. Besides there=01,s no reason to take away our=
=20
market-based rates because we are not exercising market power. So if FERC=
=20
could fix the problem with a less onerous solution (as we=01,ve proposed in=
our=20
white paper), requiring cost-based rates would constitute a regulatory taki=
ng=20
of our business and we would have to be compensated using the constitutiona=
l=20
standard.=20
CMUA does not provide any expert testimony to support its position. Rathe=
r,=20
its evidence is =01&drawn from materials prepared and testimony delivered b=
y the=20
California ISO and other public sources.=018 Beyond the difficult evidenti=
ary=20
issue posed by the fact that CMUA cannot swear to the veracity of informati=
on=20
produced by third parties, EPMI would have no opportunity to conduct=20
discovery or cross-examine of such =01&witnesses.=018=20
=====================================
|
4,441 |
Subject: A classmate submits...
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/mba__macroeconomics/29.
=====================================
Marcello Fontana sent an article from this week's BusinessWeek on an
apparently
succesful policy to promote growth.
ECONOMIC VIEWPOINT
'Bribe' Third World Parents to Keep Their Kids in School
GARY S. BECKER
Many well-meaning Americans, including college students and religious
organizations, have attacked Nike Inc. and other companies accused of
using child labor in their overseas plants in poor nations. I agree that
something should be done to save the children from dismal long-term
economic prospects. However, effective policies must recognize that the
fundamental cause of child labor is poverty, not greedy foreign and
domestic employers. To combat the effects of poverty, poor mothers
should be ''bribed'' to keep their children in school longer.
Really poor families in Brazil, Mexico, Zaire, India, and many other
nations put their children to work because their meager earnings help
provide basic food and medicine for themselves and younger siblings.
Although parents may recognize that schooling would improve their
children's marketable labor skills later in life, they cannot afford the
''luxury'' of taking them out of the labor market. In essence, child
labor is the result of a conflict between short-term parental economic
interests and the long-term interests of the children.
Adequate economic growth always eliminates child labor even without
laws
against it. But poor nations needn't wait until they grow richer. There
are short-term solutions. Many nations have compulsory schooling laws up
to age 15 or so, but they are often hard to enforce, especially in rural
areas and poor sections of large cities. Families who want their
children to work simply do not send them to school, or the children have
very high absenteeism rates. Officials are reluctant to punish parents
of working children, perhaps because they recognize that the problem is
not selfishness but poverty.
SHARE THE BURDEN. I propose a better way: Give parents a financial
incentive to keep their children in school longer. Poor mothers should
be paid if schools certify that their children attend classes regularly.
Parents would be strongly motivated to send their children to
school--even when the children do not want to go--if these payments were
not much below what the children could earn. Most poor parents would
happily continue.
[A few sentences were cut here. I think they describe Progresa
program
in Mexico. I think this program pays a few dozen dollars a month to families
that keep kids in school and immunized.]
Most poor Mexican families earn only about $100 a
month. That large a percentage increase should have a noticeable effect
on their behavior.
Poor families in less developed nations whose children do go to school
are likely to withdraw their daughters when they become teenagers. This
tends to perpetuate economic inequalities, since the children of women
who receive little schooling also tend to be badly educated. Progresa
tries to combat this tendency to favor education of older sons by paying
a little more to families that keep teenage daughters enrolled.
NARROW THE GAP. This pioneering Mexican approach appears to be highly
successful. An evaluation prepared for an October economics conference
in Chile shows that after only a couple of years, Progresa significantly
raised the schooling of children in very poor Mexican families. It has
also narrowed the education gap between girls and boys and reduced the
labor force participation of boys.
Of course, governments need to find the tax revenue to finance
programs
like Progresa. A good start would be to recognize that Mexico and many
other less developed nations typically spend disproportionately on
universities and other education of their elites. Redistributing some of
this spending to the poor would both reduce inequality and stimulate
faster economic growth. Widespread basic education is more effective in
promoting economic development than generous subsidies to the richer
students who attend universities.
Child-labor critics could spend their time more fruitfully by
attacking
not the overseas employment policies of multinationals but the social
policies of governments in poor nations that are really responsible for
the prevalence of child labor there. These governments, and perhaps
international organizations such as the World Bank, should follow
Mexico's example and introduce programs that pay poor mothers to keep
their teenage and younger sons and daughters in school and out of the
labor force.
David I. Levine Associate professor
Haas School of Business ph: 510/642-1697
University of California fax: 510/643-1420
Berkeley CA 94720-1900 email:
[email protected]
http://web.haas.berkeley.edu/www/levine/
=====================================
|
4,442 |
Subject: Re:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/587.
=====================================
We went into the FERC proceeding believing that the Chief ALJ was not
likely to give us a good decision. During the course of the proceeding, we
convinced ourselves that he would rule our way due to the vast evidence in
our favor and the relatively inept presentation of El Paso and El Paso
Merchant Energy. Well, despite the voluminous record in support of our
position, the judge ruled that it was "not at all clear" that El Paso
exercised market power. The good news for your affiliates is that, if the
Commission does not find the exercise of market power in this case, it
never will. We hope when the Commission reviews the entire record,
including the "protected material", they will change the ALJ's finding. On
some level we believe that the ALJ just does not like California. He is
the judge, after all, who told Harold Ray in the electric generation
settlement discussions that he was "an asshole". The ironic part of the
decision is that we felt that a determination by the ALJ that defined the
market in such a way as to preclude EPME having market power would be
difficult to overcome at the Commission level. Instead, he defined the
market as we suggested and found that El Paso had market power; he simply
failed to be convinced that they were withholding capacity despite the fact
that they utilized their capacity 54% of the time when everyone else was
utilizing their own capacity at a capacity factor of between 85% and 90%.
Go figure.
I am still less than enchanted with the NGS settlement after SoCalGas
tailored it to their interests but am glad that the Commission is at least
considering opening up the system ala PG&E. I think that they are
reasonably aware that SoCalGas was not blameless in the runup in gas prices
that took place last December. Having said that we are having a hell of a
time in the GCIM simply trying to investigate what really happened.
SoCalGas latest excuse for not giving us info is that we will "competitors"
with them (as a result of the filed rate litigation) for gas hedges. I
must have misunderstood; I did not realize there was a limited supply of
hedges available and that there was competition for those "available"
hedges. Anytime Enron wants to help on these GCIM issues, we would
welcome it--might make you look less like a Texas robber baron.
Douglas Porter, Senior Attorney
Southern California Edison Company
(626)302-3964
(626)302-3990(fax)
[email protected]
"Dasovich,
Jeff" To: <[email protected]>
<Jeff.Dasovich@ cc:
enron.com> Subject:
10/12/01 03:18
PM
Hi Doug:
Hope all is well. Congratulations to you folks on your agreement with
the PUC. Must be a relief.
I was writing to get your reaction to the judge's proposed order in the
El Paso case. You think the Commission is likely to adopt it? Change
it? Judge's proposal fatally flawed on the market power issue?
Appreciate your insights.
AND did you hear Bilas issued the our gas settlement as his proposed
decision for adoption by the Commission at its 10.25.01 meeting!?!?!
What next?
Best,
Jeff
**********************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate
and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of
the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by
others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or
reply to Enron Corp. at [email protected] and delete
all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not
intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a
binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its
affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be
relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise.
Thank you.
**********************************************************************
=====================================
|
4,443 |
Subject: Government Affairs-The Americas Promotions
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5242.
=====================================
I am very pleased to announce the following promotions that became effective
February 1, 2001.
Steve Montovano - Sr. Director to Vice President: Steve, as regional head for
the Eastern Seaboard area, has developed a very effective team that has
brought a very commercially focused approach to their efforts in that region.
Steve and his team have developed a model approach to transactional support
and origination that has made them an integral part of the commercial teams
that work in his region. Steve's efforts have been recognized by all,
particularly his commercial counterparts in the region.
Jeff Dasovich - Director to Sr. Director: As part of the Western States team,
Jeff has helped to coordinate Enron's actions in response to California's
energy crisis. Throughout this crisis he has worked closely with Enron
Energy Services, Enron North America and senior management of the company in
a way that fully reflects Enron's core values. He has provided and continues
to provide leadership on complex issues involving business and litigation
risk. Jeff has also provided tremendous value to the business units on a
number of transactions arising from the crisis.
Lisa Yoho - Director to Sr. Director: Lisa has been a valuable member of the
Eastern Seaboard team and , more recently has assumed responsibility for
Enron Global Markets and Enron Networks. Lisa has been an integral team
member in trying to establish a market for secondary rail transportation
capacity and in helping to launch the company's efforts into the
agricultural commodity business. In these and many other efforts in which
Lisa has been involved, Lisa has consistently demonstrated substantive
leadership and excellence.
Donna Fulton - Manager to Director: Donna joined Governmental Affairs this
past summer, and has made excellent contributions to our RTO efforts, the
sale of Portland General, and various commercial endeavors ranging from gas
matters to licensing of a hydroelectric project in California. Her extensive
experience before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has proven
invaluable to the Office.
Lara Leibman - Manager to Director: Lara consistently has produced very
high quality work across a number of industries and issues. Most recently,
she has developed both regulatory and technical knowledge on issues related
to developing a secondary market for wireless spectrum. This has enabled her
to provide a valuable leadership role while working closely with her
commercial counterparts in this and other areas.
Charles Yeung - Manger to Director: Charles has been a key player in
promoting changes to North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC)
operating policies that affect the East Trading Desk. His understanding of
the NERC policies and leadership role in NERC committees and working groups
has been essential to successfully advocating meeting the needs of Enron.
Allison Navin - Legislative Coordinator to Manager. Allison has been
responsible for the research and tracking of key issues and legislation in
the Washington, DC office as well as coordinating briefing and informational
materials and has done an outstanding job in the execution of all of her
resposibilities. In her new role, Allison will be an integral member of the
federal advocacy team, working on a number of legislative and regulatory
issues that will include broadband and e-commerce.
Ginger Dernehl - Executive Secretary to Administrative Coordinator: Ginger
has done an outstanding job in supporting and coordinating efforts for the
Government Affairs-The Americas group for the past 4 years. Her dedication
and hard work have resulted in her success and her promotion to
Administrative Coordinator. A special personal note on Ginger. Ginger, in my
mind, exemplifies and embodies the best of Enron's vision and values: She
works hard, produces outstanding results for the group, posesses an attitude
that is optimistic and fun-loving, and still does an extraordinary job of
balancing the personal and professional. Ginger, to put it succinctly, is a
treasure and I am very pleased and proud to recognize her accomplishments.
Joseph Alamo - Administrative Assistant II to Sr. Administrative Assistant:
Joseph has been with San Francisco office for 1 1/2 years, during which time
he has supported as many as five members of the Government Affairs teams.
Joseph is uniformly recognized for his willingness to take on difficult tasks
and his dedication to the company's efforts. We thank Joseph for his work on
behalf of Government Affairs and congratulate him on his promotion.
Please join me in congratulating each of these individuals that have all
made significant contributions to this company's success. I have also
attached an updated organizational chart.
=====================================
|
4,444 |
Subject: RE: Kahn & Joskow piece
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1992.
=====================================
Jeff,
As best I can tell, this is the paper summarized in the article you
forwarded. It is not new but perhaps was attached to a parties filing
(SDG&E?).
Alan
---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT on 11/28/2000 03:20
PM ---------------------------
"Sabine Schnittger" <[email protected]> on 11/28/2000
12:15:08 PM
To: <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Kahn & Joskow piece
You probably have this already, but I am attaching the Harvey/Hogan piece
that I was referring to. I haven't seen Dynegy's response, can you tell me
where I can find that?
Cheers, Sabine.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, 28 November 2000 2:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Kahn & Joskow piece
Sabine,
Thanks. Did Harvey Hogan update their study or are you refering to the
paper we referred to in our comments. If the former, could you send it to
me or point to whose comments they were attached to?
Thanks,
Alan
PS For fun and if you have it, see Dynegy's response to Hoeker's Q3.
"Sabine Schnittger" <[email protected]> on
11/27/2000 10:07:33 AM
To: <[email protected]>
cc: "Seabron Adamson" <[email protected]>
Subject: Kahn & Joskow piece
Alan,
Refer to the recent Harvey & Hogan piece for a thorough critique of recent
market power studies in the California market. Joskow & Kahn make all the
same mistakes that HH have already highlighted in the BBW work and probably
more, since a) JK were forced to use more aggregate data and b) JK had to
estimate some of their data that BBW have access to. Key criticisms include
ignoring the effects of various market efficiencies, one-part bidding,
opportunity costs in other markets and a host of data problems.
As far as the withholding modeling goes - the discussion is so vague that
it
is hard to know what data was used/approach taken. Again, forgone
opportunities in other market and as a result of water/emissions RTCs
shortages are not discussed and can explain what looks like 'withholding'.
Sabine.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, 23 November 2000 8:55 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: Emprical Study on High Prices
Attached is a paper that was filed at the FERC by Paul Joskow and Ed Kahn.
I assume it was attached to SCE's comments in the FERC price caps
proceeding.
This study appears to be the most definite analysis so far of the question:
did market fundamentals or generator market power cause the price run-ups
this summer? Joskow/Kahn conclude that although much of the run up was due
to gas prices and NOx costs, that the market was unworkably competitive;
i.e., the cost run ups do not fully explain the price run ups. Further,
they provide what they claim is evidence that individual generators
withheld this summer.
Joskow/Kahn state: "Moreover, there is considerable empirical
evidence to support a presumption that the high prices experienced in the
summer of
2000 were the product of deliberate actions on the part of generators or
marketers
controlling the dispatch of generating capacity to withhold supply and
increase market
prices." Biggest withholders in their analysis are: AES/Williams, Reliant,
and Dynegy
Marketer/traders are largely but not completely spared criticism in their
analysis. Joskow/Kahn recommend that FERC staff undertake a study of the
entire WSCC data to "Determine the role of marketers in the production and
bidding behavior of the California generators." and to find out more why CA
imports fell.
It will be interesting to see how the CA generators react to this study.
My initial read is that this is will be received as an important,
influential work. It will fuel the fire for more information release,
especially by the UDCs and CA regulators--at least release of physical
operational data.
I would be interested in your reaction to the study. In terms of potential
criticisms: I noticed that their gas prices might be low (used monthly
average data rather than daily). They also did not account for generator
marginal profit or margin recovery to account for possible outages and
noncontiguous schedules. Finally, they do not examine the benefits that
would have accrued had additional capacity come on line.
Alan Comnes
(See attached file: Joskow Kahn Paper 11_21.pdf)
- Market power issues in California (Oct 2000).pdf
=====================================
|
4,445 |
Subject: EBS Connected
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/eci/130.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 01/19/2001 05:45 PM -----
Lara Leibman@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
01/15/2001 01:27 PM
To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: EBS Connected
fyi.
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/Enron Communications on 01/15/01 01:32 PM
-----
Internal Newsroom
Sent by: EBS Announcements
01/12/01 05:21 PM
To: All EBS Worldwide
cc:
Subject: EBS Connected
Market Close 1/12/01
70 7/16 + 1
Bandwidth Intermediation
(through 1/5/01)
YTD Transactions 24
Counterparties 4
LTD Transactions 231
Counterparties 31
January 12, 2001
SUNDANCE ONLINE FILM FESTIVAL
Enron Broadband Services will be sponsoring the first ever Sundance Online
Film Festival (SOFF), an exciting new addition to the popular Sundance Film
Festival in Park City Utah, January 18-28, 2001. The online festival will
feature dynamic works such as animation, documentary and interactive pieces
specifically designed for the Web. The Sundance Institute, a nonprofit
organization, is recognized for promoting innovative, independent film
projects and is promoting the Web as the next exciting new venue for
presenting these creative ideas. To read more about Enron's participation in
the Sundance Online Film Festival, click here.
UPDATES ON PRC & BONUS
The Enron Year-End Performance Review Committees (PRC) concluded on January
9. Employees should expect review meetings with supervisors in the coming
weeks. If necessary, employees can take the initiative to schedule the
review with their manager. Verbal notification of bonuses and compensation
increases should begin on January 26, and bonus checks will be distributed on
February 5.
EBS EMPLOYEE JOINS BUSH ADMINISTRATION
Quincy Hicks, manager in EBS Public Relations, has recently left the 45th
floor of the Enron Building for the East Wing of the White House. Quincy has
been named the future First Lady's director of scheduling. Prior to joining
EBS, Quincy had worked as chief of staff for First Lady Barbara Bush
following her White House years. First Lady Elect Laura Bush is reportedly
filling her White House staff with veterans from her mother-in-law's
administration.
HOLIDAY HELPERS
EBS once again displayed its giving spirit. During the month of December,
Kevin Hannon led a group of EBS volunteers to SEARCH, an organization that
responds to the needs of the homeless by providing them with job training,
housing, education, and medical support. EBS volunteers wrapped and
presented holiday gifts to SEARCH clients. The gifts, donated by EBS,
included jackets and other cold weather clothing.
To celebrate the season in Portland, the EBS office housed the Giving Tree.
The tree was decorated with tags bearing children's holiday wishes. EBS
employees were able to select a tag and fulfill a child's wish. The tree was
picked clean, and more than 125 gifts were sent to children at the Morrison
Center, a family services organization that focuses on breaking the cycle of
abuse.
EBS employees make a difference in their communities everyday in different
ways, including volunteering and donations to their favorite charities.
Enron has made it even easier for our employees to make a difference through
the Matching Gifts and Volunteer Incentive Programs (VIP). Click here to
read more on Enron's giving programs.
EBS WELCOMES NEW EMPLOYEES
Surgient Networks Secures $57 Million in Second-Round Funding
Cisco Systems and Enron Broadband Services top the list of investors
Surgient Networks, an innovative company with a new architecture for content
delivery network applications, has received $57 million in second-round
funding as it moves ahead with its product development and planned deployment
in mid-2001.
Trade Route
As bandwidth prices plummet, some telecom players are betting on electronic
trading platforms to bring efficiency to the market.
For Kevin Hannon, chief operating officer of Enron Broadband Services,
falling bandwidth prices are welcome news. With bandwidth becoming a
perishable commodity and prices in a free fall, the only hope for telecom
carriers is a trading platform where bandwidth can be bought and sold for
future delivery. That way, they can hedge against price fluctuations and
quickly unload surplus bandwidth. Enron is building such a platform.
The Longest Last Mile
...Processing power of PCs and set-top boxes in homes is increasing. And
companies like Enron Broadband Services, Akamai Technologies, and Inktomi are
installing servers and routers all over the country to minimize the length of
fiber a movie must travel to get to the living room -- the so-called last
mile...
HOLIDAY TIME
Enron offices will be closed January 15th in observation of Martin Luther
King, Jr. Day.
=====================================
|
4,446 |
Subject: RE: T&D ESTIMATE (re: CPUC Decision re not paying Cash Refunds)
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28869.
=====================================
Tamara, thanks as well.
I assume the view below is for EES in total and we have not yet made an
attempt to match up credit by customer/meter to the forward T&D related to
positions in our book for those customer. Going on the thought that we will
only be able to offset T&D with credits on a customer by customer basis we
may not have the full $153.9MM to work with (i.e., we may have large credits
on customers for which we only have a short contract life remaining and small
credits on customers with a long life making up a larger portion of the
$153.9MM below). Am I thinking about this correctly? Is it
difficult/impossible to do that matching?
Are there any new developments/thoughts on the credits/T&D being dealt with
on a supplier basis (ie., EES) vs. a customer basis?
Wade
From: Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/17/2001 03:56 PM
To: Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Wade Stubblefield/HOU/EES@EES, Harry
Kingerski/ENRON@enronXgate, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Robert
Williams/ENRON@enronxgate, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Adriana Silva
Mara/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate,
Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: RE: T&D ESTIMATE (re: CPUC Decision re not paying Cash Refunds)
Tamara,
First, thanks for completing this analysis.
Bob,
With the opportunity to net off 153.9MM of the PX receivable amount between
now and March 2002, shouldn't we began the process of requesting both
utilities net this obligation with the outstanding PX credits while at the
same time filing a complaint with the CPUC re the way PG&E and SCE have
elected to reinstate the Direct Access bills with a zero beginning balance?
I would like to discuss this on Monday's call or before.
Wade and Mary Lynne,
What do you think?
Thanks,
Wanda Curry
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnson, Tamara
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 2:47 PM
To: Stubblefield, Wade; Kingerski, Harry; Curry, Wanda; Stoness, Scott;
Williams, Robert; Black, Don
Subject: T&D ESTIMATE (re: CPUC Decision re not paying Cash Refunds)
Here is an estimate ($millions, nominal) of the T&D&Other tariff cost:
An additional uncertainty is any "expiration date" of the PX credit
reimbursement. I have only shown costs until March 2002.
The attached file sets out the cost by month for the entire duration of the
position.
<< File: estimated T&D cost by month.xls >>
---------------------- Forwarded by Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES on 07/17/2001
02:39 PM ---------------------------
Scott Stoness
07/11/2001 09:32 AM
To: Wade Stubblefield/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Wanda Curry/Enron@EnronXGate, Tamara
Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Williams/ENRON@enronxgate
Subject: Re: re Your Call on CPCU Decision re not paying Cash Refunds <<
OLE Object: StdOleLink >>
Wade. I don't think anyone can answer this question with certainty. It is
mushy.
My reading is that any payment owed to PGE/SCE (including surcharge) would
be eligible to reduce our Px acccount's recievable.
But I welcome any other comments.
We will do it both ways:
- Assuming the $10/MWh surcharge can be used and
- Assuming that it cannot be used.
Harry tells me that the bigger issue is that PGE/SCE have stopped showing the
Acct Rec. on the customers when we switched back. So there is nothing to
credit against. This issue will have to be resolved by the CPUC.
Tamara Johnson will be providing an estimate by month on Friday.
Scott
Wade Stubblefield
07/10/2001 08:40 PM
To: Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Wanda Curry/Enron@EnronXGate, Tamara
Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Williams/ENRON@enronxgate
Subject: Re: re Your Call on CPCU Decision re not paying Cash Refunds <<
OLE Object: StdOleLink >>
Bob/Wanda,
Can either of you please address Scott's questions.
Thanks
Wade
Scott Stoness
07/10/2001 02:54 PM
To: Wade Stubblefield/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Wanda Curry/Enron@EnronXGate, Tamara
Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black
Subject: re Your Call on CPCU Decision re not paying Cash Refunds
Wade.
You asked (Jay) if we had done an analysis of whether our T&D costs going
forward is enough to offset the Px credit. This is a complicated question:
Is the $10/MWh surcharge part of T&D
Is the most recent $30/MWh (which is really $51/MWh after several gyrations)
surcharge part of T&D?
Is Public purpose and decommissioning part of T&D?
Are we likely to get the same account numbers back if we switch back to DA?
Will we have to have the same account number to benefit from our accounts
recievable.
Anyway, I have put this issue on my list and will give an estimate (with a
list of assumptions) by the end of this week.
Scott Stoness
=====================================
|
4,447 |
Subject: FW: URGENT- CSUF Interconnection Study and CEQA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/276.
=====================================
What is the matter with Bob? What does he mean by 'Enron/CSU has not made the
decision'? Did we say that and if so, who? Dirk
-----Original Message-----
From: Fantz, Donald [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 1999 8:49 AM
To: 'Dirk VanUlden@Enron'
Subject: FW: URGENT- CSUF Interconnection Study and CEQA
Dirk,
FYI....I didn't see you on the cc: ....Don Fantz
----------
From: Kinert, Robert
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 4:52 PM
To: 'Dick Smith'; 'Rob Cone'
Cc: Fantz, Donald; Hagen, John H; Colicchia, Rocco; Raymond, Galen
Subject: URGENT- CSUF Interconnection Study and CEQA
Dick and Rob:
Clearly, all of us at PG&E, CSUF and Enron want the Detailed Interconnection
Study for CSUF finalized and released as soon as possible. Given your
project's time line it is important for us to avoid any unnecessary delays.
There are several critical path issues related to CEQA that urgently need to
be resolved. In particular, we were very concerned to learn a few days ago
from Enron that CSUF has not made a decision about including our
interconnection work in its CEQA process. That decision has a very
substantial impact on our work, and in particular jeopardizes our ability to
even begin our work by October 2000, much less complete it by then.
From the outset of this project we have indicated we were assuming CSUF would
include PG&E's portion of the work in your CEQA filings. As we explained
back in February, doing so greatly reduces both the time and cost to comply
with General Order 131-D, which governs CPUC CEQA review of PG&E transmission
projects. At our November 15, 1999 meeting we tried to reinforce the need to
include PG&E's work in CSUF's CEQA process.
While the CEQA issue has been an ongoing topic of discussion with this
project, it may be helpful to summarize for you here. In brief, if the work
to be performed by PG&E is included as part of the CEQA review of a larger
project, under General Order 131-D the lead agency is responsible for
conducting an environmental review to ensure that CEQA requirements are met,
including assessment of the impacts of work to be performed by PG&E. Once
that CEQA process is complete PG&E can request an exemption from the CPUC
based on the environmental review completed by the lead agency. It usually
only takes a few months for the CPUC to grant such an exemption.
By contrast, if you do not include PG&E's work in your CEQA process, we would
be required to file a PTC (Permit To Construct) with the CPUC. This process
can take 12 to 18 months or more to complete, depending upon the complexity
and protests of the project, would typically add $300,000 or more to the
costs, and, most important, would preclude project completion by CSUF's
desired date of October, 2000.
I can not over emphasize the need to move forward on the CEQA issue. Even if
the work performed by PG&E is included as part of CSUF's CEQA filing for the
substation project and PG&E requests an exemption from the CPUC as discussed
above, the time frame and outcomes for the CEQA process are uncertain
because formal CPUC review and approval of our request for exemption is still
required. Part of this CPUC review will require public notice of the
project. If the exemption request is unchallenged, approval of the exemption
will be granted within approximately 40 days of the filing. This is a best
case estimate. If the exemption request is challenged by the public, the
CPUC will evaluate the validity of the protest pursuant to G.O. 131D
regulations. If the CPUC finds that PG&E has appropriately applied the
exemption criteria to the project, then the CPUC will grant the exemption.
However, should the exemption request be denied, the CPUC could subsequently
direct PG&E to file for a Permit To Construct or provide the information or
mitigation needed to resolve the public protest (including the possibility of
requiring undergrounding of facilities, which as you know would be at CSUF's
expense). As discussed above, the process of obtaining a Permit To Construct
could take 12 - 18 months or more and substantially delay the project.
As with the Informational Review provided last February, we are preparing our
Detailed Interconnection Study with the understanding that CSUF will include
PG&E's work in its CEQA process. If CSUF chooses to not include PG&E's work
in its CEQA process, then PG&E would need to revise the study in terms of
scope and costs before it can be finalized and released.
We want to work with you to make this project a success but we need your help
to do so. Please let us know how you would like to proceed. We are prepared
to release the study, based on the understanding that CSUF will include
PG&E's work in its CEQA process, within the next three to four business days.
Sincerely,
Bob Kinert
=====================================
|
4,448 |
Subject: $10 Off Your $20 Order from drugstore.com
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1254.
=====================================
<http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&aid=2&aparam=em2134>
Dear Amazon.com Customer,
Our trusted Health & Beauty partner, drugstore.com <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&aid=2&aparam=em2135>, invites you to take advantage of a special offer--$10 off your nonprescription order of $20 or more.
Looking good means feeling good, and at drugstore.com you'll find the top-selling items you need to put your best face (and body) forward. Try out popular Crest Whitestrips, and show off a brighter smile in just 14 days. You'll also find anti-aging products, salon hair care, weight loss and nutrition help, and lots more.
So stop by drugstore.com, and save $10 on your order of $20 or more <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&aid=2&aparam=em2136> today. Hurry, this offer expires August 31.
Sincerely,
Mike George <http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/dm_fathers_day/may/mike_sig.gif>
Mike George
General Manager, Amazon.com <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/home/home.html> <http://www.amazon.com/>
Delighted drugstore.com Shopper
<http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/drugstore/bestsellers.gif>
Crest Whitestrips <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743 &bounce=%2Fproduct%2Easp%3Fpid%3D69313%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2137>
<http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/movies/summer_sale/arrow2.gif>
Top 10 whitening products <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D20216%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2125>
<http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/drugstore/more_top_10s.gif>
* Anti-Aging <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D21817%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2130>
* Salon Hair Care <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D12749%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2129>
* Diet Products <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D13338%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2128>
* Nutrition Bars <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D21902%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2131>
* Hair Removal <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D21516%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2126>
* Home Spa <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D21818%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2127>
* Pedicure <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D20454%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2132>
<http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/movies/summer_sale/arrow2.gif>
See all Top Sellers <http://www.drugstore.com/user/promo.asp?code=9u9a648ce63743&bounce=%2Fcategory%2Easp%3Fcatid%3D19320%26aid%3D2%26aparam%3Dem2133>
The fine print:
Promotional certificates must be redeemed through drugstore.com's Web site, <http://www.drugstore.com/> (also accessible via the Health & Beauty tab at Amazon.com), toward the purchase of products listed in the drugstore.com online catalog and sold by drugstore.com.
Offer is not applicable to prescriptions, gift certificates, shipping, or sales tax. U.S. shipping destinations only.
Entire amount must be used on a single order. Balance cannot be carried forward. This offer will appear in your Shopping Bag once you have filled it with $20 worth of nonprescription items.
This offer cannot be redeemed at Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.de, Amazon.fr, Amazon.co.jp, or any other Web site operated by Amazon.com, its affiliates, or third-party merchants accessible from our site. Promotional certificates are not valid for payment at Amazon Marketplace, Auctions, or zShops.
Limit one promotional certificate per customer and one promotional certificate per purchase. Each unique claim code may be used only once.
Cannot be redeemed for cash. Cannot be combined with other offers.
Offer expires at 11:59 p.m. PDT on August 31, 2001.
If you have any questions, send e-mail to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.
Only Amazon.com is authorized to make you this offer. We would like to point out that when you redeem this offer, drugstore.com recognizes you as part of a select group of Amazon.com customers.
We hope you enjoyed receiving this message. However, if you'd rather not receive future e-mails of this sort from Amazon.com, please visit your Amazon.com account page <http://www.amazon.com/your-account/> and under the Your Account Settings heading, click the "Update your communication preferences" link.
Please note this e-mail was sent to the following address: [email protected]
=====================================
|
4,449 |
Subject: Fwd: DJ - Siting Of Transmission Lines May Be Tied With FERC RTOs
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12862.
=====================================
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 10:46:45 -0500
From: "Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]>
To: "Aryeh Fishman" <[email protected]>, "Andrea Settanni"
<[email protected]>, "Deanna King" <[email protected]>, "Dan Watkiss"
<[email protected]>, "Jacqueline Java" <[email protected]>, "Kimberly
Curry" <[email protected]>, "Paul Fox" <[email protected]>, "Ronald
Carroll" <[email protected]>
Subject: DJ - Siting Of Transmission Lines May Be Tied With FERC RTOs
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
FYI
DJ Siting Of Transmission Lines May Be Tied With FERC RTOs
Copyright , 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The White House energy-policy blueprint's call for
federal eminent domain authority to site power transmission lines appears to
be garnering cautious support from Western-state lawmakers who typically
support private property rights.
They indicated the administration's policy call will win their support as
long as states continue to have a say in the siting process and the rights of
private property owners are respected.
The report of the National Energy Policy Development Group, a White House
task force spearheaded by Vice President Dick Cheney, called for the Energy
Department, in consultation with federal agencies and state and local
government officials, to develop legislation granting authority to obtain
rights-of way for electricity transmission lines.
The proposed legislative effort should advance "the goal of creating a
reliable national transmission grid," the White House policy blueprint
recommends, noting that similar siting authority already rests at the federal
level for natural gas pipelines.
"The siting process must be changed to reflect the interstate nature of the
transmission system," the White House report said.
Senate Energy Committee Chairman Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, sponsored
legislation in the last Congress to establish federal eminent domain
authority for transmission lines.
The White House report cited instances when states vetoed transmission lines
despite the benefits the proposed facilities would provide for the interstate
power grid. For example, Connecticut recently scuttled an underwater power
line designed to supply power-hungry Long Island, N.Y.
"The states ought to have the maturity to deal with this themselves,"
Murkowski said.
But pro-states' rights lawmakers said the traditional transmission-siting
role of states must be preserved, but be backed up by federal oversight.
The siting of transmission lines is the "prerogative" of state and local
governments, said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., who nevertheless suggested he
could support some form of federal authority as a "backstop" to state and
local authority.
"I have been a critic of this and I remain so," Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho,
said of the administration's policy recommendation, citing the potential
impact on the "rights of private property owners."
Nevertheless, Craig suggested the administration's recommendation could be
accommodated as part of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's push
to turn control of power grid assets over to independent regional
transmission organizations, or RTOs.
"Out of that (RTO) concept, it may be possible to address what the president
has asked for," Craig said.
Tying such eminent domain authority to the RTO process is an approach FERC
likely would take.
FERC Chairman Curt Hebert suggested the White House's policy recommendation
could be delegated to RTOs.
"America has to decide: Is electricity going to be an interstate commodity?
If so, we have to treat it like one," Hebert said last week in support of the
administration's policy recommendation.
Linking transmission siting with RTOs also was espoused by Pat Wood, chairman
of the Texas Public Utility Commission and one of President Bush's nominees
to fill two vacancies at FERC.
Having RTOs oversee expansion of the U.S. interstate transmission system is
"probably a good way to go," Wood said at his confirmation hearing last week.
Wood said the market should identify transmission expansion needs. But if the
market doesn't produce the needed results, then there should be "a fallback
role for FERC to assure there isn't a train crash," he said.
Such a regional planning approach within FERC's RTO scheme likely will win
support from state regulators, said Charles Gray, executive director of the
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.
The administration's call for framing legislation in consultation with the
states likely will blunt potential opposition from state utility regulators,
Gray said.
-By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6647,
mailto:[email protected]
(END) Dow Jones Newswires 21-05-01
=====================================
|
4,450 |
Subject: Legislative Support
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12582.
=====================================
Mike:
I regret that we had a difficult call yesterday. We greatly appreciate the
good work that you do and the commitment you and your firm have to our
company. Moreover, I recognize that the legislature is a difficult
environment and that there is substantial pressure on you and Sandy. I also
recognize that needs and demands can change quickly and, at times, our RCR
process can be difficult!
All that said, however, the Government Affairs group has an obligation to use
our internal and external resources in the best and most cost-effective
manner. The RCR process helps us satisfy that obligation..
From our conversation yesterday and a later call with Sandy, it appears that
there is some confusion on how we will use the RCR process to contract for
legal support for our legislative efforts. Hopefully this e-mail will
clarify the process so there is no confusion in the future and so that you
can feel comfortable you are undertaking work that is authorized and for
which we have a budget.
1. To begin, it appears from your e-mail yesterday that Goodin, MacBride has
billings as of May 11 for approximately $10,000 on direct access, windfall
profits, the "Global Settlement," and Power Plant Siting. With respect to
this work, I recognize that there may have been confusion about our budgeting
and RCR approval process. These billings will be included in the
RCR-approval requests discussed below.
2As we discussed yesterday, the work associated with the billings in May was
conducted without any RCR approval or any budget in place. As you know we
terminated the two legislative retainers at the end of April. No RCRs were
filed to cover the matters on which work was completed in May.
I did receive a budget on legislative matters on May 8. However, a decision
was made only yesterday to proceed on a specific matter-by-matter basis. The
work in May should not have been undertaken while we considered whether to
proceed with an overall legislative budget or proceed with specific RCRs. In
short, the proposed budget was not RCR approval.
In the future, any work undertaken by Goodin MacBride should only be
conducted pursuant to an approved RCR. If an emergency arises--i.e., an
issue arises that could not have been contemplated, we can get emergency
approval for work necessary to respond to the emergency. Please contact me
in the event of an emergency. I can be reached through my office
line--503.464.7945, pager--888.916.2262, or cell phone 503.539.4733. If I
can't be reached, please contact Jim Steffes. Jim's pager number is
888.906.9676. Note that both Jim and I wear the pager at all times and
respond immediately to messages left on the pager.
3. Pending RCR approval for the matters identified below, I have asked
Goodin MacBride to participate in the Direct Access coalition meetings taking
place today and tomorrow. In a discussion with Sandy yesterday, I agreed
that Goodin MacBride should participate in a telephonic conference on the
Calderon bill.
4. To the maximum extent possible, you should include Leslie Lawner in
future Direct Access Coalition meetings, conference calls, legislative
drafting efforts, etc.
5. If there is any confusion on whether there is RCR approval for a
particular matter, please contact me before undertaking an assignment. If I
am unavailable, please contact Jim Steffes.
6. Today, Sandy is filing several RCRs for legislative support on Direct
Access, Siting, Windfalls Profits, and the Global Settlement. They will be
considered at next Monday's RCR conference call. If they are approved, Sandy
will manage the Goodin MacBride assignments associated with Direct Access,
Siting, and Windfalls Profits.
7. Jeff Dasovich will manage all work associated with the Global Settlement,
whether it is legislative or not. This does not mean that Sandy cannot give
assignments to Goodin MacBride that involve the Global Settlement; it simply
means that before that work begins Jeff must approve the work.
This particular issue is a critical matter for our company. Jeff is involved
in the strategy and business calls concerning this matter and is working on a
daily basis with Jim Steffes, Rick Shapiro and Steve Kean to develop our
position and advocate that position in the settlement discussions. We must
ensure that our Sacramento efforts are fully coordinated with our strategy
and business interests (as they develop through the settlement
discussions). To avoid any confusion on the scope of Jeff's responsibility,
I consider all legislation addressing the Edison MOU, any future MOUs with
Sempra, and "Plan B," to be part of the Global Settlement.
Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the above.
Again, we appreciate your hard work and commitment to our efforts.
Paul Kaufman
=====================================
|
4,451 |
Subject: FW: Governor Chicken
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/822.
=====================================
Below is an article that may be of interest to you.
Ginger Dernehl
Administrative Coordinator
Global Government Affairs
Phone# 713-853-7751
Fax# 713-646-8160
-----Original Message-----
From: Schmidt, Ann M.
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:04 PM
To: Dernehl, Ginger
Subject: Governor Chicken
REVIEW & OUTLOOK (Editorial)
Governor Chicken
10/22/2001
The Wall Street Journal
A18
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
The two politicians who've arguably benefited most from the national focus on war are both Californians -- Congressman Gary Condit and Governor Gray Davis. Too bad Mr. Davis is finding he still can't avoid his own chickens coming home to roost.
Only now are the folks in Sacramento learning that their Governor's "solution" to the energy crisis has been a political sham. A combination of collapsing budget revenues, foolish spending and bad credit ratings threatens to plunge the state into a full-fledged financial crisis.
Governor Davis's chickens left the roost back in May 2000, when California's botched scheme to deregulate electric power encountered a wicked price bubble. Wholesale prices, which had been deregulated, shot up, while retail prices, which were still regulated, didn't budge. This mismatch, along with other factors, generated huge supply disruptions and a first-class energy crisis.
The obvious response would have been to let retail rates rise with the market price. Mr. Davis said so himself in his now infamous observation that if he raised rates, the problem would be solved in 20 minutes. Mr. Davis preferred to play the blame game, including a lot of whining that he had inherited the situation.
While the Governor complained, California's two largest utilities were pushed into insolvency and neighboring states endured the double whammy of having their power sucked into California and seeing their electric rates shoot up. Californians suffered through rolling blackouts.
Finally, this past January -- eight months after the energy crisis began -- the Governor responded: Retail rates were increased twice, and the state started to purchase power directly from suppliers, using money from its general fund. At the same time, the state negotiated contracts with suppliers at prices that are now well above market prices and for terms as long as 20 years.
And then Mr. Davis got lucky. Although the forecast was for a summer of continued blackouts generated by a strong demand for power, the disaster failed to materialize. Not only was the weather cooler than normal, but higher rates produced immediate conservation; thus demand was moderate and power sufficient. Newsweek went out and hailed the Governor as a political Lazarus.
But now here come the chickens. It seems that almost one-quarter of California's budget revenues were provided by taxpayers with stock options and capital gains, mostly from Silicon Valley companies. When the dot-com industry started to implode, so did revenue projections -- to $12 billion this year, down from $18 billion last year. And this was before September 11 and the collapse in the Nasdaq market.
California would probably be able to absorb this revenue hit were it not for the still outstanding bills from the Governor's electric power fiasco. Consider the toll:
-- Somebody is going to have to pay for the $14 billion that the utilities owe to suppliers for power consumed before the state started buying electricity.
-- Somebody is going to have to repay the $12.5 billion bond issue that California hopes to float to replenish the money borrowed from its general fund.
-- Somebody is going to have to pay for those expensive, long-term contracts that the state negotiated.
-- Somebody is going to have to repay the bridge loan of $4.3 billion that California got from the banks hoping to underwrite the bond offering. (If this loan is not repaid by November 1, its interest rate jumps to 7% from 4%, resulting in an extra $250,000 in interest payments a day.)
Whether these bills are ultimately assumed by ratepayers or taxpayers, or some combination of the two, the impact on California's economy and its budget will be dreadful. Observers are estimating a budget deficit of almost $10 billion for next year.
As for Governor Davis, the problems of the "previous administration" are now his own. And Californians know it. A recent statewide poll showed that most voters preferred the former mayor of Los Angeles, Richard Riordan, the leading Republican challenger to Mr. Davis, by several points.
The Governor's response to the ever-worsening economic situation has been typical. He complains. He vetoes a few spending bills. He announces a $5 million campaign to persuade Californians to help the local economy by staying in-state for their vacations. We expect to see a lot of chickens on surfboards.
Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
=====================================
|
4,452 |
Subject: Dow Jones story on Assembly Republican Plan "R"
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: []
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2984.
=====================================
Calif Assembly GOP Releases 'Plan R' To
Rescue Elec Utils
Updated: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 04:14 PM ET
LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--California's Assembly Republicans on Wednesday
released
"Plan R", an alternative to Democratic proposals on how to restore the
state's financially
struggling utilities to solvency.
The plan put forth by the Republicans, who are in the minority in the
Assembly, would have
Edison International (EIX, news, msgs) unit Southern California Edison and
PG&E Corp.
(PCG, news, msgs) unit Pacific Gas and Electric Co. pay down debts by way
of a
dedicated-rate component taken from existing utility rates, including a
rate hike effective
March 27.
Plan R would also increase the utilities' future
return on
investment, and allow for cost recovery in the
future, a press
release said. The utilities have incurred more than
$14 billion
in undercollections because under a rate freeze
they couldn't
pass high wholesale power costs to customers.
Utility rates
are frozen through March 2002, unless state
regulators
decide to lift the freeze sooner.
To help lower rates, utilities would be required
under Plan R
to produce more short-term and long-term power as
well as
sign long-term contracts to hedge against real-time
price
spikes. Lower rates would also come from
negotiating
reduced prices for power bought from qualifying
facilities and
from negotiating with larger generators to accept
only 70% of
the money they are owed for past power deliveries.
"The critical element (of a 30% concession) must come from the governor's
leadership," said
Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox. "Republicans aren't going to support
any plan without
a comparable negotiated concession from generators by the governor."
The governor met with generators two weeks ago and asked them to accept 70
cents on the
dollar from utilities. Most haven't said definitively whether they are
willing to accept those
terms, although Reliant (REI, news, msgs) has flatly refused to accept less
than 100%.
Plan R is a response to Gov. Gray Davis' plan to buy SoCal Ed's
transmission lines for $2.76
billion and to help the utility issue $3 billion in bonds backed by
ratepayer revenue.
"The Republican plan is a shared solution that delivers more power to the
grid. The governor's
plan socks ratepayers with a staggering bill for transmission line junk,"
said GOP
Assemblyman Keith Richman.
Davis' agreement with SoCal Ed, announced more than five weeks ago, has
gotten a cold
reception from Democrats as well, who have proposed several "Plan B"
alternatives, two of
which are being taken more seriously than others.
One would have the state hold a five-year option to buy SoCal Ed's
transmission lines for their
$1.2 billion book value, and would allow the utility to sell bonds backed
by ratepayers for an
amount determined by state regulators. That plan would also require the
utility's creditors to
accept 75 cents on the dollar for money owed.
The other Plan B would allow Pacific Gas and Electric to issue bonds
secured by their assets
and use the revenue to pay creditors. In turn, the utility would pay an
assessment, essentially
a tax that would be used to service its debt.
The Republicans' Plan R applies to both utilities, a spokeswoman for the
Assembly
Republican Caucus said. It is meant, in part, to move things forward,
because the Democratic
proposals have encountered slow going as of late, both Democrats and
Republican
lawmakers say.
"Plan B has become Plan Backtrack," Cox said. "It is time to consider other
options."
But the Republican plan doesn't really offer much that is new, noted one
consumer advocate.
Democrats are already pushing for generators to accept less than what they
are owed, as
well as for long-term contracts and qualifying-facility price reductions,
said Michael Shames of
the Utility Consumers' Action Network.
"The irony of the Republican proposal is that it is remarkably similar to
the one being
developed by the Democrats. It would appear as though the Republicans are
trying to use a
trick that Bill Clinton mastered - taking the opposition's idea and calling
it his own," Shames
said.
The plan also doesn't explain how or why utilities would want to get back
into regulated
generation, vis-a-vis requiring them to produce more supply, Shames said.
As well, funding
the plan within current rates isn't possible, he said.
"The bottom line is, the Republicans aren't pushing anything new or
exciting. And in one case
(funding within give rates), not even feasible. But I'm glad they are
trying. I just wish they'd try
harder to do something in a bipartisan way rather than play political games
with the truth,"
Shames said.
-By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;
[email protected]
Richard Costigan, III
Chief of Staff
Office of the Assembly Republican Leader
California State Assembly
Phone:(916) 319-2005
=====================================
|
4,453 |
Subject: FERC gives Kern River project speedy approval
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4490.
=====================================
From today's Gas Daily:
***FERC gives Kern River project speedy approval
Only three weeks after receiving the certificate application, FERC
Friday granted Kern River Gas Transmission authority to proceed
with a 135 million cfd expansion of its system that will move new
gas supplies from Wyoming to California. The unprecedented speed in
which FERC completed its review of the $81 million project grew out
of the commission's desire to address the energy crisis in
California, which is expected to worsen this summer in light of
forecasts for continued high gas prices and shortages of power
generation capacity.
FERC typically takes several months to complete the review
process of a pipeline project application of similar size to Kern
River's, a FERC spokeswoman said. But the commission said its staff
was able to successfully coordinate regulatory efforts with
federal and state agencies to ensure Kern River's application
process moved expeditiously.
"We are pleased the FERC has fast-tracked this application," said
Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River. "We
are looking at every option to bring additional supplies of natural
gas to the California market in time for the summer cooling
season," he said.
The expansion will include three new "emergency" compressor
stations: the Elberta Compressor Station in Utah County, Utah; the
Veyo Compressor station in Washington County, Utah; and the
Daggett Compressor Station in San Bernardino County, Calif. The
installation of these new facilities -- which have been approved by
various permitting agencies in Wyoming, Utah, Nevada and California
-- will boost capacity on the system by 19%, Kern River said.
The proposal also included upgrades at three existing
compressor stations: the Muddy Creek Compressor Station in
Lincoln County, Wyo., the Fillmore Compressor Station in Millard
County, Utah; and the Goodsprings Compressor Station in Clark
County, Nev. The plan also included an upgrade of the existing
Wheeler Ridge Meter Station in Kern County, Calif. Kern River said
Friday that the expansion's expected in-service date is July 23.
"Our rapid certification of these facilities is evidence that we
are prepared to do whatever we can to rush supplies to the West
Coast markets," FERC Chairman Curt Hebert said in a statement
Friday. "My fellow commissioners, William L. Massey and Linda K.
Breathitt, pulled together, with staff's assistance, to give priority
to the West's energy needs."
Although she voted to approve the certificate, Breathitt wasn't
completely happy with the process involved in permitting. "[I]t has
been somewhat difficult for me to view Kern River's 'California
Action' project as being one that necessarily merits the kind of
extraordinary regulatory treatment that we have granted the
applicant in this case," Breathitt wrote in a partial dissent. "My
hesitation does not come only from the fact that Kern River has
pending before this commission a very similar proposal in which
the parties have raised valid concerns that would pertain to any
expansion of Kern River."
In a separate proceeding, Kern River, a subsidiary of Williams,
filed an application with FERC last year for permission to add
124,500 dth/d of firm transportation service, which is scheduled
to go into service May 1, 2002. Breathitt argued that it would have
made more sense for the commission to have considered the two
applications at the same time.
But she also stressed that, because of capacity constraints at
the Wheeler Ridge, Calif., interconnections with the intrastate
distribution systems of Southern California Gas and Pacific Gas and
Electric, the Kern River expansion may not benefit its intended
beneficiaries -- power plant operators. "[T]he record of this
proceeding is inadequate for the commission to independently
assess the congestion issues at Wheeler Ridge," she said. "I am very
uncomfortable that this order does not take the opportunity for a
fuller airing of this issue."
Breathitt argued that FERC's order will not necessarily result
in any net increase of gas in the California marketplace because of
the congestion at Wheeler Ridge.
Intervenors in the case, she noted, have alleged that insufficient
take-away capacity at Wheeler Ridge and the resulting degradation of
firm shippers' rights will place them in a situation analogous to
the type of capacity rights controversy that FERC recently
addressed at the Topock delivery point.
She praised FERC staff for meeting the compressed deadlines in
the order, but she also said, "The precedent we have created could
be a double-edged sword. What signals does this order really send?
Will the commission be able to keep up this pace on other pending
'emergency' expansion applications?" (CP01-106) MH/CD
=====================================
|
4,454 |
Subject: Dow Jones on DWR contracts
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/226.
=====================================
LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--California Secretary of State Bill Jones has bolstered calls by top Republican legislators for an independent audit of the state's long-term energy contracts and purchases in the spot market.
Such an audit could eventually lead to renegotiating some of the $44 billion in contracts signed by the California Department of Water Resources, Jones said at a press conference Monday. He was joined at the event by former California governor George Deukmejian.
"Certainly it would be of benefit to the state based on the prices it paid to have some of those contracts renegotiated, though we have to follow the law like any other party," Jones said.
In recent weeks, Jones has called on California Attorney General Bill Lockyer to investigate possible conflicts of interest posed by consultants hired to negotiate contracts who also owned stock in energy companies. The state Fair Political Practices Commission is investigating the matter, and the federal Securities and Exchange Commission is also investigating whether any stocks were traded by state employees using insider knowledge. The attorney general hasn't officially said if he is investigating. Under state law, energy contracts could be void if a conflict of interest was found to exist during their negotiation.
"Some will say there are already many investigations underway, but a comprehensive audit conducted by an independent accounting firm is an entirely different matter," Jones said. "The attorney general's office isn't trained and equipped, nor is it their responsibility to perform such a comprehensive business audit."
The CDWR, which started buying power in January in lieu of the state's three cash-strapped utilities, has come under fire in recent weeks for buying too much power under long-term contracts and for locking in market-peak prices for up to 20 years. The CDWR has signed $44 billion in long-term deals and spent about $9 billion on spot purchases.
Senate, Assembly Republican Leaders Request Audit
Jones, who hopes to run against Gov. Gray Davis next year, said he supports a letter sent by Republican leaders to State Controller Kathleen Connell in mid-July requesting that she arrange an audit of the state's energy spending.
The letter, sent by Senate Minority Leader James Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga, and Assembly Minority Leader Dave Cox, R-Sacramento, asks that Connell consider arranging and paying for an outside consulting firm to determine if power contracts and purchases were prudent and if they will necessitate electricity rate hikes.
Connell's office verified that she received the letter and said she was preparing a response.
"We're responding to all the questions in the letter; we are definitely answering the questions. Check in later this week," said Lisa Casalegno, Connell's press secretary.
The letter, a copy of which has been obtained by Dow Jones Newswires, singles out two topics in addition to prudence and rate hikes. Those topics include how the price of energy was calculated and whether or not energy consultants pose a conflict of interest.
According to the letter: "How does the Administration arrive at the price of energy purchased through the long-term contracts? Are these figures inclusive of variable factors that can impact the potential price of energy? What is the true cost for the consultants with whom the Administration has contracted for electricity purchases? What oversight and accountability precautions have been taken to ensure that there is no conflict of interest?."
Connell has said in recent months that she fears the state's energy purchases will jeopardize its general fund as well as prospects for a $12.5 billion revenue bond sale in October to fund long-term power contracts. Last week, Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine, asked the Assembly to hold immediate oversight hearings to investigate the state's energy-related activities, saying he had "serious concerns regarding several of the administration's actions."
Governor's Office, CDWR Say Audit Unnecessary
A CDWR spokesman dismissed calls for an audit as being politically motivated, noting that spot-market power prices have declined markedly since the contracts were signed.
"We're in a good position: we've avoided blackouts this summer and we have a reliable injection of energy, and that was our goal," Oscar Hidalgo said. "Everyone's trying to turn over a rock, but the bottom line is, we're seeing a market that's been well in control since June."
Davis' spokesman Steve Maviglio agreed that an audit wasn't needed.
"These have been the most scrutinized contracts the state has ever entered into," Maviglio said. "Besides, as a matter of course there will already be an audit for all CDWR spending by the State Auditor's office."
-By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; [email protected]
=====================================
|
4,455 |
Subject: Re: URGENT FERC Hearing on Sept 12
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/144.
=====================================
jackasses? that might not be a word we'd want to use in emails that might,
shall we say, get into unfriendly hands....
Gary Ackerman <[email protected]> on 09/05/2000 02:37:49 PM
Please respond to [email protected]
To: Bill Ross <[email protected]>, Bob Anderson <[email protected]>,
Carolyn Baker <[email protected]>, Corby Gardin
<[email protected]>, curt hatton <[email protected]>, Curtis
Kebler <[email protected]>, Denice Cazalet
<[email protected]>, Gene Waas <[email protected]>, Greg Blue
<[email protected]>, Jack Pigott <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich
<[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]>, Dan Douglass <[email protected]>, Anne-Lee Tomczyk
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: URGENT FERC Hearing on Sept 12
They did it! The jackasses changed the hearing date to Sept 12 as of 3
pm today. A lady from FERC just called me to let me know.
My suggestion is we cancel our scheduled Board meeting, meet prior to
the 12th, and get our story in line. Another notice will be published
by FERC regarding participation in the Hearing.
gba
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 12:28:29 -0700
From: Gary Ackerman <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Organization: Foothill Services
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bill Ross <[email protected]>, Bob Anderson
<[email protected]>, Carolyn Baker <[email protected]>, Corby
Gardin <[email protected]>, curt hatton <[email protected]>,
Curtis Kebler <[email protected]>, Denice Cazalet
<[email protected]>, Gene Waas <[email protected]>, Greg Blue
<[email protected]>, Jack Pigott <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich
<[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]>, Dan Douglass
<[email protected]>, Anne-Lee Tomczyk <[email protected]>
Subject: dand
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
I just copied from the FERC's web page the following notice. It appears
that FERC will hae a hearing in San Diego, possibly on Friday, Sept 15.
However, an earlier date is equally likely because all four
Commissioners are testifying at a Congressional Hearing in San Diego on
Sept 11. I guess we need to agendize this for our next meeting, and if
the FERC holds its hearings on Sept 12, we may need to cancel our Board
meeting, and attend this. I did call the office of External Affairs at
FERC to register WPTF as a speaker. They were clueless, but promised to
call me back.
gba
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING ON
WHOLESALE POWER MARKETS AND
TRANSMISSION SERVICES IN CALIFORNIA
(September 1, 2000)
On September 15, 2000, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission is planning to convene a public meeting in San Diego,
California to allow interested persons to give the Commission
their views on recent events in California's wholesale markets.
While the Commission is finalizing arrangements for a meeting on
September 15th, the Commission may need to change the meeting to
a different date within the week of September 11th. A further
notice will be issued confirming the date. The meeting is
scheduled to begin at 9:00 a.m., at the San Diego Concourse, the
Copper Room, 202 C Street, San Diego, California 92101. All
interested persons may attend the meeting. The meeting will be
transcribed. A separate notice will be issued before the
meeting, setting forth an agenda and identifying the panels of
participants. Additional information may be obtained from the
Office of External Affairs at (202) 208-0870. Information also
may be obtained from the Commission's web page at
www.ferc.fed.us.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.
Acting Secretary
=====================================
|
4,456 |
Subject: RE: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]; [email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2132.
=====================================
Thanks Jeff. I really hope that he agrees. I would think Enron would surely
want to be represented and to make sure its viewpoints are aired, and I know
everyone else feels it is important to learn from this. I just learned that
John Fielder, SCE's Senior Vice President for Regulatory Policy and Affairs,
is confirmed as a panelist.
We are awaiting word from you on the sponsorship, and won't say anything
until you can tell us what.
Best,
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:10 AM
To: Lee S. Friedman
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity
Lee: I'm not certain that it will be possible to get Skilling, but I'll
get back to you soon. Also, I want to manage expectations a bit about the
possibility of having Enron stream the conference. Just don't want us to
get ahead of ourselves. I'd prefer that it not go out in any announcement
at this juncture. Thanks a bunch.
Best,
Jeff
"Lee S. Friedman"
<[email protected] To: "Tim Belden"
<[email protected]>, "Jeff Dasovich"
keley.edu> <[email protected]>
cc:
10/04/2000 05:52 PM Subject: Nov. 13 UC
summit conference on electricity
Jeff and Tim,
Tim, I know Jeff knows all about the conference we are organizing and I
hope
you do as well.
Rob, I and the rest of the conference organizers are wondering if you could
help us find out if Jeff Skilling from Enron would be willing to be one of
our panelists? He has been an articulate critic of the current state of our
electricity markets, and we definitely would like the genco perspective
represented.
Naturally we are hoping to get a quick answer because our publicity about
the conference will be going out shortly.
A brief description of the conference is appended below. Please let me know
if you need any additional information.
Thanks very much for your help and advice.
Lee
The summer of San Diego has prompted the School, in collaboration with UC's
Energy Institute and Competition Policy Center, to sponsor a high-level
summit conference on electricity deregulation. The focus, and the audience,
will be national, but heavily informed and influenced by the California
crisis. The conference will evaluate (1) the wisdom of deregulation and
(2)
how the pitfalls encountered so far can be avoided and remedied. The
University will facilitate an open, honest and reasoned exchange between
executive-level players from various perspectives: industry, regulators,
consumers, legislators, academics, and market and system operators.
The format entails two roundtable discussions with six speakers and a
moderator. During the panel sessions, the speakers will engage in a
debate/dialogue on the current situation in electricity deregulation, where
we have come from, what the future holds, and what solutions lie on the
horizon. Each speaker will have uninterrupted time to speak, followed by
Q&A
and discussion. We expect a live audience of about 200, including a large
press presence. One sponsor has tentatively offered to provide internet
streaming video services. We hope to have a balanced group of sponsors
ranging from the American Public Power Association to energy companies.
The speakers are being arranged at this time. We have commitments from:
Loretta Lynch (Chair, CPUC), and PJM CEO Phil Harris. We have a preliminary
acceptance from Steven Littlechild (England's former primary electricity
regulator) and Laura Tyson (former Chair, President's Council of Economic
Advisors and National Economic Council, currently Dean, Haas School of
Business). We have invited FERC Commissioner Curt Hebert, and U.S.
Representative Edward
Markey, executive-level managers from several energy companies and state
legislators. Former DOJ chief economist Carl Shapiro will be on one of the
panels, as will economist Severin Borenstein, Director of UCEI and
Professor
of Business and Public Policy. Michael Florio from The Utility Reform
Network (TURN) will be a consumer advocate on one of the panels. Lee
Friedman, economist and Professor of Public Policy, will briefly provide an
introduction to the panel discussions with his talk "Lighting the Stage:
The
Electricity of Deregulation."
A dinner for the panelists and organizers will be hosted at UC's Goldman
School of Public Policy following the conference proceedings. We have
reserved rooms for our speakers at Berkeley's landmark Claremont Hotel. We
can reimburse those speakers who request it for coach airfare expenses and
other ordinary local expenses.
Forfurther information, please contact:
Lee S. Friedman
Professor of Public Policy
Goldman School of Public Policy
University of California
2607 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94720-7320
Ph: (510) 642-7513
Fax: (510) 643-9657
email: [email protected]
=====================================
|
4,457 |
Subject: CSO - Abundance of High-Tech Recruiting Activity this week
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1716.
=====================================
Just a reminder regarding all of the high-tech recruiting activity
taking place this week. Where noted, please sign-up in BearTracks
if you plan to attend.
By the way, the correlation between the sign-ups and
the actual attendees has been inconsistent so far this year. It really
helps the companies regarding space and food planning as well as how many
reps to send. Please sign up if you plan to attend and remove yourself
if your plans change. The system allows you to sign up up to one day before
the
event.
Thanks,
Rich Wong
Account Manager, Technology
Haas Career Center
MONDAY/TODAY
6PM - Autodesk presentation (Faculty Club) - this is primarily
for engineering students, but Autodesk will be recruiting at Haas
for finance in October and will be able to provide a good overview
of the company tonight (just show up, no sign up)
WEDNESDAY
12:30PM - Sun Microsystems corporate presentation (Faculty Club, sign up in
BearTracks)
6:00PM - Apple Computers corporate presentation (Faculty Club, sign up in
BearTracks)
THURSDAY
12:30pm - Samsung corporate presentation (especially for students interested
in Pacific Rim
opportunities), Faculty club, sign up in BearTracks. NOTE HAASWEEK DATE IS
INCORRECT.
12:30pm - Microsoft corporate presentation (Faculty Club, sign up in
BearTracks)
2:00pm-4:00PM - Microsoft drop-in hours for 1:1 discussions with Microsoft
reps
(Haas Career Center Conference Room, no sign up needed)
6:00 - Compaq corporate presentation (Faculty Club, sign up in BearTracks)
SNEAK PREVIEW
Next Monday, Siebel Systems will be presenting. See their message below,
sign up in BearTracks. NOTE
HAASWEEK DATE IS INCORRECT.
****************************************************************************
********************
What's it like to work for the fastest growing company in America? Siebel
> Systems will be on campus to talk about our company, our culture, and
> opportunities for you to be a part of it.
>
> When: Monday , October 2nd at 12:30 PM
> Where: Faculty Club
>
Brian Stone, Haas '98 and Director of Product Marketing, Wireless Products
will talk about Siebel's vision, the eBusiness Application market, and
Siebel's rise to the fastest growing enterprise application company in
history. Additionally, you will get a chance to talk with some of the Haas
'99 and '00 grads and hear about their experience at Siebel.
> Other opportunities to get to know Siebel:
>
> * Pat House, Cofounder and Executive Vice President Siebel Systems,
> will keynote the Haas Women In Leadership Conference on November 11, 2000
> .
>
> * Siebel will be on-campus interviewing 2nd year MBA students for
> positions in Product Marketing, Alliances, and Business Development on
> November 9.
>
> Why Siebel? Besides being the undisputed worldwide leader in eBusiness
> application software, Siebel has redefined business practices in the
> application software industry. These are a couple things that make Siebel
> unique:
>
> * Commitment to 100% customer satisfaction. A lot of companies say it,
> Siebel means it. At Siebel, we believe that if our customers are
> completely satisfied, the company's success will follow. Siebel employees
> will drop everything to make sure our customers are happy. All Siebel
> employees, from sales people to VP's, have incentives in place to ensure
> that customer satisfaction is our number one priority.
>
> * Develop a product that customers want, not what engineers can build.
> Product Managers talk to customers, find out what their needs are and then
> define product specifications to meet their needs. Siebel is a product
> marketing driven organization, not a technology driven one.
>
> Siebel was one of the largest high-tech recruiters on campus last year,
> largely due to our ability to retain our small-company atmosphere. Each
> Haas MBA has been given the tools, responsibility, and independence to
> make a difference at Siebel, and to have a tremendous impact on the
> success of the company. We are hiring in three areas:
>
> * Product Managers lead Siebel's on going process to define, produce
> and improve its world class web-based enterprise applications. A Product
> Manager at Siebel is the general manager for his/her product, responsible
> for the driving the definition, launch and ongoing revenues.
> * Alliance Managers identify, recruit, and manage Siebel Alliance
> Partners and ensure Siebel Systems and the Partner meet agreed-upon
> business objectives in terms of revenue, product delivery, and market
> share.
> * Senior Financial Analysts provide senior management with the
> information they need to operate and grow the business, including
> developing and preparing monthly/quarterly reporting packages and working
> with senior management to define key performance indicators.
>
> Siebel is redefining the rules of business. Come out and talk with us
> about how we do it.
>
=====================================
|
4,458 |
Subject: FW: PGE Bankruptcy motions
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'CARL A. EKLUND; JAMES L. HUEMOELLER']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4045.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/09/2001 05:51 PM -----
Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate
04/09/2001 05:25 PM
To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Travis
McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B
Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J
Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: FW: PGE Bankruptcy motions
fyi
-----Original Message-----
From: "JOHN G KLAUBERG" <[email protected]>@ENRON
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22JOHN+20G+20KLAUBERG+22+20+3CJKLAUBER+40LLGM+2ECOM+3E+40E
[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 5:01 PM
To: Tribolet, Michael
Cc: CARL A. EKLUND; JAMES L. HUEMOELLER
Subject: Fwd: PGE
Michael: as you know, one of my SF bankruptcy partners, Ben Young, attended
the PG&E hearing today. Here is a quick synopsis. Could you please
distribute as appropriate. John
==============================================================================
This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidential
and may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This
e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to
be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended
recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me.
The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this
e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
==============================================================================
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 15:46:25 -0400
From: "BENNETT G. YOUNG" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected], "JOHN G KLAUBERG" <[email protected]>, "JAMES L.
HUEMOELLER" <[email protected]>
Subject: PGE
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
I attended the hearings on PGE's two cash collateral motions today. Both
were granted on an interim basis. The court set a final hearing for May 9 at
9:30 am. PGE is to file its pleadings by April 20 and any opposition is due
by May 4.
The bondholder cash collateral motion was heard first. There was no
opposition and the bond trustee (Bank of New York) consented to the relief.
BONY and PGE are working on a final cash collateral stipulation.
Next was the gas supplier motion. PGE mentioned in its presentation that the
basis of the pre-petition agreement was the waiver of termination rights in
the event of bankruptcy by the suppliers in return for a security interest in
the receivables. Jim Lopes, PGE's lawyer, mentioned that he had learned a
great deal about Bankruptcy Code section 556 in the last few months. Judge
Montali nodded his head at that comment. Montali also asked whether PGE
conceded that 556 applied. Lopes answered that he did not concede that it
applied, but he was "very concerned."
I asked whether the post-petition security interest was available to
suppliers that were not parties to the pre-petition agreements. The Court
said that was up to PGE; Lopes said they were willing to talk about it, but
they did not want to grant liens to all of their creditors and hoped
creditors would rely on their administrative claims, which PGE believes will
be paid in the ordinary course. Procedurally, the Court said it would not
authorize any new security interests on the basis of the interim order
resulting from today's hearing. Instead, that would have to be the subject
of a separate motion with notice, and perhaps coujld be taken up at the final
hearing.
P
GE also indicated that it is filing today a lawsuit against the CPUC seeking
a TRO regarding a deadline of April 11 for the filing of certain advice
letters. A hearing is tentatively scheduled on the TRO for 3 pm tomorrow,
April 10.
There was also discussion of various administrative matters, like scheduling
hearings, entering a case management order, etc.
A representative of a consumer group, the Coalition for Public Power, read a
statement asking Judge Montali to rollback rates and to force PGE's parent to
pay the utility's debts. The Judge let them speak, but made it clear that it
was not an action item, and seemed generally to ignore them.
The courtroom was packed with attorneys, journalists and members of the
public. After the hearing, the reporters all descended upon the attorneys
for PGE and the CPUC. The courtroom is in an office building in SF's
financial district; there were probably ten TV cameras set up on the sidewalk
as well as several protesters carrying signs.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Bennett G. Young
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 400
San Francisco, California 94111
(415) 951-1167
[email protected]
=====================================
|
4,459 |
Subject: New EIA Electricity Demand Growth Estimate: 3.1% growth in 1999
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1191.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Miyung Buster/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/26/2000 04:09 PM
-----
Rob Bradley@ENRON
10/26/2000 03:39 PM
To: Miyung Buster/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: New EIA Electricity Demand Growth Estimate: 3.1% growth in 1999
Attached is a press release from the DOE's Energy Information
Administration announcing a 3.1% increase in power generation last year.
This is the 3rd increase in the 1999 electric generation estimate from EIA.
The first estimate was 1% growth from 1998, the second 1.6%, and the third is
3.1%. The 1999 increase comes on top of a 1998 increase of 3.5%--a year that
some attributed solely to the El Nino warming spike. Even if so, 1998 is now
normalized by the 1999 jump.
Pancaking 3-4% growth years is really phenomenal, especially when the EIA
forecast is around 1.5% per year growth.
Something is going on with electricity demand, and Mark Mills'
Internet-electron thesis is looking better and better.
Whatever occurs with 2000 demand and generation, some consumption (phantom
generation) has been lost in California from the shortages. Only with an
open production (and transmission) market do we know how much demand is
really growing.
- Rob
Energy Information Administration
EIA Reports
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, DC 20585
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OCTOBER 26, 2000
Nonutility Net Generation Up 37 Percent in 1999
Net generation of electricity from nonutility (nonregulated)
generators increased 37 percent in 1999, advancing from
11 percent to 15 percent of total net electricity generation
according to information released today by the Energy
Information Administration in "Electric Power Annual 1999
Volume II" (see Figure). Electric utilities (regulated
generators) and nonutility generators combined to produce a
record 3.7 trillion kilowatthours in 1999, a 3.1 percent
increase over 1998.
The shift in electricity generation from regulated to
nonregulated generators was driven largely by State-level
restructuring legislation which requires or encourages
divestiture of a utility's generating assets. In 1999,
50,884 megawatts of electricity generating capability was
sold by utilities to nonutilities. In addition to the
purchases of generating assets from utilities, nonutility
companies added 6,769 megawatts of new capability, compared
with the 3,689 megawatts added by utilities.
Additional highlights from the report include:
* Over half (54 percent) of the nonutility net generation
of nearly 0.6 trillion kilowatthours was from gas. Coal,
however, increased its share of nonutility net generation
to almost 23 percent in 1999 from 16 percent in 1998,
primarily as a result of recent purchases of coal-fired
generating capability from utilities. More detailed data
on nonutility capability will be available later this
month with the release of "Inventory of Nonutility
Electric Power Plants in the United States 1999." For
detailed utility capability data, see "Inventory of
Electric Utility Power Plants in the United States 1999"
at:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/ipp/ipp99_sum.html
* Although there was a 3.1 percent increase in net
electricity generation, utility and nonutility emissions
of sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide were up 2.1 percent
and 3.0 percent, respectively, as most new generating
capability is gas-fired. Nitrogen oxide emissions remained
unchanged from the 1998 level.
"Electric Power Annual 1999 Volume II" is available on EIA's
Internet site at:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epav2/epav2_sum.html
Printed copies of the report will be available in November
from the U.S. Government Printing Office, 202/512-1800 or
through EIA's National Energy Information Center, 202/586-8800.
The figure referenced above may be viewed along with this
press release on EIA's Web Site or can be requested from EIA's
Press Contact.
**************************************************************
The report described in this press release was prepared by the
Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical
and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy.
The information contained in the report and the press release
should be attributed to the Energy Information Administration
and should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any
policy position of the Department of Energy or any other
organization.
**************************************************************
EIA Program Contact: Robert Schnapp, 202/426-1211
EIA Press Contact:
National Energy Information Center, 202/586-8800
EIA-2000-19
-------------------------- To Unsubscribe -----------------------------
You are currently subscribed to eiapr as: [[email protected]]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
[email protected].
Please do not use the reply button.
=====================================
|
4,460 |
Subject: WSJ Article on Pres. Clinton's Press Conference
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/728.
=====================================
Clinton Pledges Support for Californians
Under Pressure From High Electric Bills
A WSJ.COM News Roundup
WASHINGTON -- President Clinton said he has asked federal regulators to look
into the possibility that California electricity producers have engaged in
profiteering this summer.
Asked Wednesday if he thought the power companies were unfairly taking
advantage of the power shortages in California he responded, "Well, that's
what the [Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is] going to investigate."
Mr. Clinton also announced other steps to help consumers in Southern
California deal with "skyrocketing" electric bills and called on Congress to
pass legislation to "build a better energy future over the long run."
"We'll do what we can to help you get through this summer," Mr. Clinton told
Californians, referring especially those in the San Diego area where the
price crunch has been most severe.
Speaking on the steps overlooking the Rose Garden moments before leaving for
a political fund-raising trip to New Jersey, Mr. Clinton said he has ordered
these steps:
The FERC has been asked to quicken the pace of its investigation into
wholesale power markets "so we can better understand what's happening in
California and provide policy-makers with the information they need to
protect consumers in a timely fashion."
The Department of Health and Human Services will release $2.6 million to
Southern California families from the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program. Mr. Clinton said that doubles the amount of aid available in the San
Diego area and will help low-income families and the elderly "to pay their
bills and stay cool."
The Small Business Administration has been told to put out the word about SBA
loans "to help cope with unusually high electrical bills."
Residential and business customers who receive power from the San Diego Gas
and Electric Co., a unit of Sempra Energy, have seen their bills double or
even quadruple since rates were deregulated in June.
The phased-in, south-to-north deregulation of California's $20 billion
electrical power industry was supposed to lower prices by creating greater
competition.
But demand for electricity has outstripped supply because of a growing
population and a booming high-tech economy and less power available from
neighboring states that haven't deregulated. A sweltering summer in
California has contributed to the problem.
Mr. Clinton said the problem has a broader base than just the current price
crunch in southern California.
"I also renew my call to Congress to work with us to build a better energy
future over the long run, to take up my energy budget initiatives and the tax
incentives to promote energy efficiency and conservation," the president said.
"I hope they will also pass a national comprehensive bill to foster a new era
of the right kind of competition in the electric industry, to establish a
more competitive, efficient and reliable electric power system for our nation
and to beef up efforts to prevent utilities from abusing their market power
to raise rates above competitive levels," he said.
Mr. Clinton said those steps would save American consumers about $20 billion
a year.
Responding to questions, Mr. Clinton was asked about high gasoline prices and
what the U.S. is doing to convince oil-producing nations to increase
production at lower prices.
He said he will discuss the issue on his trip to Nigeria, a big oil producer,
later in the week and that renewed economic growth elsewhere in the world is
"putting more pressure on the oil supplies that are available."
Mr. Clinton said the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries will
suffer if high oil prices trigger regional recessions, causing oil purchases
to drop dramatically.
He said OPEC will be much better off at a lower, sustainable oil price.
"They don't want to go down to $13 to $15 a barrel again, but it needs to be,
I think, in the low $20s somewhere," Mr. Clinton said, calling that "the more
sustainable rate."
One benchmark crude oil was priced Wednesday at $32.68 a barrel (see full
coverage of the commodities markets).
Thane Twiggs
08/23/2000 10:27 AM
To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff
Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron@EES, Susan J
Mara/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Karen Denne@ENRON
Subject: Re: Daily Update/Information on CA Activity
FYI:
As some of you may know President Clinton held a press conference today where
he discussed the CA price spikes and other issues. Apparently he will put
together a task force and provide relief to customer groups via income
assistance and the SBA.
Karen Denne of the Communications department is putting together additional
information at this time.
=====================================
|
4,461 |
Subject: Ken Lay's Meeting w/Davis' Energy Advisors
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8824.
=====================================
On Friday, I attended a meeting with Ken Lay and Karen Denne that Mike Peev=
ey=20
and David Freeman requested. Mike Peevey was President of Southern=20
California Edison before founding NEV (which he eventually sold to AES). =
=20
Freeman is General Manager of LADWP. =20
The Governor hired Peevey to be his chief energy advisor. Freeman is the=
=20
Governor=01,s chief negotiator responsible for signing power contracts on b=
ehalf=20
of DWR now that the Legislature has passed AB1X and the Governor has signed=
=20
it. John Burton, the leader of the State Senate, is responsible for gettin=
g=20
the Freeman the job of chief negotiator, but Peevey was clearly in charge. =
=20
Also at the meeting was Vikram Budraja, former SVP of power systems and=20
planning for Edison. He=01,s now a private consultant that Freeman hired t=
o=20
help him with the contract negotiations.
Peevey asked for the meeting to urge Enron to respond to DWR=01,s RFP issue=
d on=20
Friday. Peevey/Freeman want to announce a package of deals on Tuesday. Th=
ey=20
implied that they=01,ve already got some deals done and expect to have 8+ d=
eals=20
to announce on Tuesday, though they gave no details other than to say that=
=20
they=01,ve got a deal with Calpine (as reported in the press). Their plan =
is to=20
announce on Tuesday the names of the suppliers they=01,ve signed with, the =
total=20
number of megawatts signed, and the average price per MW. They are concern=
ed=20
that the media will want them to make public the details of each individual=
=20
deal, which for obvious reasons they don=01,t want to do.
Peevey and Freeman also said that they don=01,t want to sign too many long-=
term=20
contracts though they recognize that there=01,s a trade-off between term an=
d=20
price.
Ken Lay told them that Enron would respond. ENA is preparing a response. =
He=20
also told them that EES was working on a plan to reduce demand at our=20
customers=01, facilities and that the plan would be completed and ready for=
=20
implementation very soon.
I=01,ve summarized the points that Ken Lay made and the responses from Peev=
ey=20
and Freeman:
It would be difficult to enter into contracts without some assurance that D=
WR=20
is creditworthy.
Response from Peevey/Freeman:
AB1X provides DWR the funds necessary=01*beginning on Friday, Feb 1st=01*to=
=20
purchase the power necessary to fill the utilities=01, short position. Ken=
Lay=20
pressed them on this point and Peevey insisted that AB1X provides the funds=
=20
needed to pay suppliers.
The RFP should give suppliers maximum flexibility in coming up with proposa=
ls.
Response from Peevey/Freeman:
Be as creative as possible. All offers will be considered (despite the=20
language contained in the RFP).
The only customers who have been protected from California=01,s failed=20
restructuring law are customers who chose another provider under Direct=20
Access. In addition, one of the quickest ways to help solve California=01,=
s=20
shortage is to work with customers to reduce demand and develop on-site=20
generation. Taking away Direct Access and access to customers generally=01=
*as=20
AB1X does=01*is therefore a dumb idea and must be reversed.
Response from Peevey:
He agreed but said that it was impossible to remove it from the bill. He=
=20
affirmed what we already know=01*that the head of the Senate oversight comm=
ittee=01*
Debra Bowen=01*is working on a =01&clean-up=018 bill to remove the prohibit=
ion. In=20
response to Ken Lay=01,s points that California needed to make sure that ut=
ility=20
interconnection and stand-by rates didn=01,t continue to impede on-site=20
generation, Peevey and Freeman said that the Governor understood the proble=
m=20
and was prepared to fix it.
Siting laws have got to be streamlined and California (i.e., the Governor)=
=20
has got to credibly commit to the swift development of new power plants in=
=20
order to push the forward curve down.
Response from Peevey/Freeman:
The Governor is scheduled to offer a plan this week that is targeted at=20
expediting siting and development.
DWR should accept demand reduction bids at the same time that it accepts=20
supply-side bids.
Response from Peevey/Freeman:
They agreed but said that there is extreme political pressure to announce t=
he=20
signing of some supply deals on Tuesday in order to prove to legislators th=
at=20
DWR will be able to keep the lights on, and at a =01&reasonable=018 price. =
They=20
also need to sign some deals in light of the fact that the feds are very=20
unlikely to extend the DOE order forcing suppliers to sell to the IOUs. On=
ce=20
they=01,ve shown that they can manage the supply side, Peevey and Freeman s=
aid=20
they want to quickly turn their attention to demand-side bidding.
These are the highlights. I=01,d be happy to give more details on the Mond=
ay=20
morning \call.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
4,462 |
Subject: Re: FTC Probe into Retail Sales
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9682.
=====================================
Just let me know when you'd like to chat.
Best,
Jeff
Lara Leibman
03/06/2001 11:29 AM
To: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: FTC Probe into Retail Sales
Sarah,
The FTC info that you need is set forth below. Please let me know when you
have had a chance to review it and we can go from there. Perhaps you and
Jeff Dasovich and I could set up a call to discuss this? If that sounds
good, let me know when would be a good time to chat and I'll set it up.
Thanks very much.
Lara
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/NA/Enron on 03/06/2001 11:27 AM -----
Lara Leibman
03/02/2001 04:32 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: FTC Probe into Retail Sales
Jeff,
This is the info that I referenced on my voice-mail. Please call me after
you have had a chance to review it. Thanks.
Regards,
Lara
FTC Requests Comments on Retail Electricity Competition Plans
The Federal Trade Commission today announced that it is seeking information
regarding the results to date of different regulatory approaches to the
introduction of competition into the retail sale of electricity. The
Commission has approved a Federal Register notice, to be published shortly,
that contains a series of questions designed to help gather this information.
The Commission will produce a report that discusses the advantages and
disadvantages associated with different approaches to particular issues and
that identifies, if warranted, areas in which additional federal legislative
or regulatory action may be desirable.
As detailed in the notice, many states have enacted, and in some cases begun
to implement, legislation designed to introduce competition into the retail
sale of electricity to encourage lower prices, better service and greater
innovation. To date, 24 states and the District of Columbia have set dates
when customers will be allowed to choose their electric power supplier.
Recently, however, substantial price increases and reliability problems in
some areas undergoing this transition have raised questions about the best
way this restructuring can be designed to benefit retail customers. In light
of recent price increases and reliability problems in California and western
states generally, some states have delayed, or are considering delaying,
implementation of retail competition plans.
The Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee of the United States House
of Representatives, W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, and the Chairman of the Subcommittee
on Energy and Air Quality, Joe Barton, have requested that the Commission
examine various state retail competition programs and describe those features
that appear to have resulted in consumer benefits and those that have not
yielded consumer benefits. In addition, the Commission has been asked to
examine possible jurisdictional limitations on the states' authority to
design successful retail competition plans and whether there is a need for
federal legislative or regulatory action. To comply with this request, the
Commission will update its July 2000 staff report "Competition and Consumer
Protection Perspectives on Electric Power Regulatory Reform."
For the updated report, the Commission proposes to examine state plans that
allow customers to choose their generation supplier, and state plans with
unique approaches to retail electricity competition. The Commission will work
with the states to understand the various features of the plans and to gather
facts relevant to understanding the market reaction to a particular state's
plan.
The Federal Register notice contains additional questions about which the
Commission seeks public comment. The Commission seeks comments on features of
state retail competition plans that have benefitted consumers and those that
have not. The Commission is particularly interested in receiving information
about the market response to various provisions of state retail competition
plans. It is not necessary to respond to each question for every state.
Written comments in response to the questions in the Federal Register notice
are due by April 3, 2001 and will become part of the public record. They may
be submitted to: Donald S. Clark, Office of the Secretary, Federal Trade
Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. Submissions
should be captioned: "V010003 -- Comments Regarding Retail Energy
Competition." Electronic submissions may be sent by e-mail to:
"[email protected]" and may also be sent on floppy disk, as described
in the notice.
The Commission vote to publish the Federal Register notice was 5-0.
This is the FR Notice text from the FTC web site at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/02/eleccompetition.htm:
=====================================
|
4,463 |
Subject: RE: EnronOnline Article
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/11827.
=====================================
thanks
Cameron Sellers
Vice President, Business Development
PERFECT
1860 Embarcadero Road - Suite 210
Palo Alto, CA 94303
[email protected]
650.798.3366 (direct dial)
650.269.3366 (cell)
650.858.1095 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 5:43 PM
To: Cameron Sellers
Subject: EnronOnline Article
USA: INTERVIEW-EnronOnline sees volume growth, CEO says.
By Gelu Sulugiuc
07/17/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.
NEW YORK, July 17 (Reuters) - As most players in a shrinking pool of online
energy trading platforms struggle to stay alive, leader EnronOnline has a
simple philosophy: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The Internet arm of the energy marketing and trading giant Enron Corp. ,
EnronOnline predicts it will increase its volume and says it can coexist
with the IntercontinentalExchange (ICE), the chief executive of Enron
Networks told Reuters on Tuesday.
The innovative company is always evaluating its business environment, ready
to remold itself according to market demands, but it is not pursuing
mergers or aquisitions for now, according to Greg Piper.
"I would never say never, but we're not proactively looking at aquiring an
ownership position in any other exchange platform," Piper said.
With an average of $3.5 billion in trades every day, EnronOnline enjoys the
highest volume of all energy electronic platforms. Most energy trading
platforms launched last year have failed to generate profits.
Its closest rival is ICE, which routinely exceeds $1 billion a day. But
while ICE is a many-to-many exchange that matches bids and offers, on
EnronOnline one can only trade with Enron.
"It's a tool that supercharges our market-making business," Piper said.
Enron is the No. 1 natural gas and electricity marketer in the United
States. About 60 percent of its transactions are captured through the
electronic platform.
"As long as we show good prices to our customers, our volumes will continue
to grow," Piper said.
The company is looking to grow online volume in products such as metals,
steel, weather, petrochemicals and plastics.
"We're trying to remain the leader in energy and help our other markets get
more traction," Piper said. "There is a huge amount of growth that we
haven't even tapped into yet."
Piper said he is not worried about ICE's recent success. The Atlanta-based
exchange recently took over London's International Petroleum Exchange and
plans to transfer its open-outcry business online, significantly boosting
its trade volumes.
"Maybe six to 12 months from now, the story might be a lot different,"
Piper said. "But right now, there is room for the both of us."
He added that Enron traders do not shy away from trading on ICE. Many of
the energy giants that founded ICE and provide most of its liquidity are
also Enron's biggest clients.
"Enron will seek out a good deal on ICE when there is one," Piper said.
INNOVATION KEY TO SUCCESS
Recognized as one of the most innovative companies in the United States,
Enron is constantly evaluating its position in the market and thinking of
ways to become more successful.
"The right thing to do in November 1999 was to launch EnronOnline," Piper
said. "But we look at it every day and if it made sense to do something
different, you can bet that Enron would do it and we wouldn't be emotional
about it."
One of the company's advantages is the fact that its software is a flexible
application that allows EnronOnline to easily go in an out of different
markets and regions. It constantly adds new products to its trading
arsenal.
But Piper said that EnronOnline has no plans to turn itself in a
many-to-many exchange.
"We want to focus in providing our markets to others," he said. "In the
near term, we're not changing that."
The company is considering licensing the application itself, but would not
elaborate on who wants it and how much Enron would ask for it.
EnronOnline has been so successful that even its competitors take their
hats off.
"I've been hearing for two years now that a one-to-many exchange wouldn't
work, but Enron just keeps proving people wrong," said Frank Getman, chief
executive of online energy exchange HoustonStreet.
"If you're willing to make tight two-way markets and be the best price in
the market, then people will continue to use your site."
Enron's stock rose 41 cents to $49.53 a share on Tuesday in trading on the
New York Stock Exchange.
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
| |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
=====================================
|
4,464 |
Subject: Re: Re[2]: HD Case: Proposed Plan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5422.
=====================================
All,
I was thinking along similar lines - HD should moderate growth in the
coming year - only invest in opening 2-3 new stores in locations with the
highest estimated ROI, or perhaps those that are?the most complete
(since there is some construction in progress already) to reduce any
incremental expense.?
Focus instead on improving operating efficiencies which have been
steadily deteriorating to increase investor confidence/stock price.
Then expand via another public offering at a later date.?
Sarah had asked in class to look?into whether HD was going to be
able to make payroll in the coming year. I tried to do this assuming no
expansion (freeze all construction in progress). Using Mark's
spreadsheet and backing out the new store acquisition
costs, and reducing inventories that would have been part of the
new stores, this still leaves a cash need from financing
of $25.8 mil in order to meet operational ! needs. So they?are going to
need to tap into credit lines for at least this amount regardless.
I will be in class tonight. If you have a conf call, could we do it at
7:30? If we do, please send across details before 5PM, or else
you can just leave me a voice mail on my cell at 916 600 1245
and I'll retrieve it during break...
-Anil
? Mark Guinney <[email protected]> wrote:
Jeff, I assume you can coordinate a conference call from work. Call me at
home:
415-388-2548.
Excellent points and I was thinking along similar lines. Questions I have:
How do you know that LT debt gives more advantageous terms? We have no yield
curve info nor do we know their credit rating.
At what point does their borrowing exceed their covenents?
Is our strategy to not raise the required $66million or to stop/slow PPE
spending so that the $66m is not needed?
**********************************************
Mark D. Guinney, CFA
Consultant
Watson Wyatt Investment Consulting
345 California Street, Ste. 1400
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 733-4487 ph.
(415) 733-4190 fax
____________________Reply Separator____________________
Subject: Re: HD Case: Proposed Plan
Author: [email protected]
Date: 02/07/2001 ! 11:25 AM
Hi folks:
Since we have only one page, the write up for number 4 will have to be very
brief. Before writing it, though, I wanted to offer a few bullets
regarding what angle we might take, and let folks respond, comment,
counter, etc. before writing it up. I'll clean and beef up once we've
agreed to the approach we'd like to take to question #4. Finally, I can
work from my office on this this evening, which means that I can use the
conference call capability of my office phone to patch everyone in if we'd
like to do a conference call. If that's what folks would like to do, I'd
prefer to do the call at around 7 PM. Just let me know.
Best,
Jeff
The question for #4 is:
Stock price is down 23%, significant debt has already been tapped to
support massive growth and covenants on that debt restrict taking on a lot
more debt.
What should HD do w.r.t. current operations and future growth strategy?
I! n the near term focus less on growth and more on getting margins and
EBIT growth back in line with results from previous years. (Management's
Letter to Shareholders alludes to this, but it's difficult to determine
whether management is just paying lip service to the need to capitalize on
the growth spurt and grown earnings, or continue on the growth effort.)
With respect to funding future (more moderate growth), the company
does have some room to increase long-term debt (e.g., current ratio for
1986 = 2.26). It seems that HD would get better terms and have increased
flexibility by issuing additional debt rather than relying on lines of
credit. As such, HD ought to look those sources of funding and fill in any
"funding gaps" with funds from the line of credit.
Given the significant drop in stock price, HD is likely better off in
the near term 1) moderating growth, 2) improving performance to generate
cash internally, and 3) using! long-term debt issuance to provide the funds
needed. Once performance and stock price improves, then HD should consider
a stock issuance.
How can company improve operating performance?
Reduce selling, store operating expenses and pre-opening expenses
Improve receivables turnover
Improve inventory turnover
Improve per store/sales
Consider closing poor-performing stores
All of which will improve margins
Should company change its strategy? If so how?
Shift from meteoric growth to moderate, targeted growth, and focus on
generating positive cash flow from operations
Focus on improving performance at existing stores; specifically focus on
controlling costs and asset turnover and productivity
Consider another debt issuance rather than rely extensively on credit
line in order to decrease cost of funds and increase flexibilit
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
=====================================
|
4,465 |
Subject: Summary of 3.2.01 meeting to fix Direct Access prohibition
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3487.
=====================================
Apologies. At a loss to figure out how in the heck your name disappeared
from this mega-list.
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/05/2001 11:02 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
03/04/2001 12:30 PM
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly
Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol
Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H
Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES,
Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy
Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward
Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES,
Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W
Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G
Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES,
James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James
Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES,
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy
Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin
Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES,
Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES,
Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael
Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected], Neil
Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula
Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita
Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES,
Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES,
Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tanya
Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri
Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES,
Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES,
William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran
Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, James
Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Dirk vanUlden/Western
Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, Jennifer
Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas
Condon/SFO/EES@EES, [email protected], Scott Govenar <[email protected]>,
Hedy Govenar <[email protected]> @ ENRON, [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Summary of 3.2.01 meeting to fix Direct Access prohibition
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/04/2001 12:06 PM -----
A meeting with Sen. Bowne's staffer Lawrence Lingbloom took place on 3.2.01
to discuss fixing the DA prohibition in AB1X.
About 30+ other interested parties attended.
On 3.1.01 Bowen's office had distributed a complex proposal; and the meeting
was convened to discuss the proposal.
The proposal distributed by Lingbloom was unacceptable and rejected but at
least it acknowledged the need to allow some level of DA, i.e., moved away
from a complete prohibition on DA.
After much discussion, Lingbloom left the meeting for a while, during which
time the group engaged in a productive discussion with CDWR/CA Dept. of
Finance.
The group asked DWR/Finance if they could agree to a program that:
a) treats bond financing costs as a nonbypassable charge designed to cover
the period during which the customer consumed power subsidized and purchased
by DWR;
b) includes an exit fee for customers switching to DA if, and only if, there
are actual costs associated with power contracts signed by DWR that might be
"stranded";
c) permits an open season for "free switching" to DA when demand exceeds the
sum of DWR's firm contract portfolio, retained generation and QF cost. This
would mean that the amount of load covered by DWR's spot purchases, plus new
load growth, should not face restrictions on Direct Access.
DWR wanted to include an agreement on information exchange, which might
include noncore customers advising DWR in advance when they will switch to DA.
In return, DWR offered to post information about their power contracts and
terms AFTER contracts were executed.
Enron's outside attorney is drafting language to capture the concepts
discussed at the 3.2.01 meeting.
The draft will be distributed and discussed on Monday, 3.5.01.
=====================================
|
4,466 |
Subject: Update Day 1 Second Session FERC CA Settlement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/2841.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/04/2001 10:28 AM -----
Susan J Mara
01/04/2001 12:40 AM
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly
Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol
Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H
Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES,
Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy
Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward
Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES,
Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W
Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G
Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES,
James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James
Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES,
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy
Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin
Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES,
Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES,
Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael
Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike M Smith/HOU/EES@EES,
[email protected], Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L
Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert
Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES,
Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES,
[email protected], Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted
Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir
Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected],
[email protected], Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Update Day 1 Second Session FERC CA Settlement
In the Room
Conference attended by all in-state generators, a few munies, the IOUs and a
few others. One attorney from CPUC, but on phone. Barbara Barkovich attended
for CA Large Consumers. Nader sent someone. No other consumers. One other
ESP -- Strategic Energy (only operates in San Diego).
Judge reports that only 6 offers have been submitted to FERC for sales to the
IOUs (note; Enron submitted one of the offers). The offers total 2000 MW. The
prices are quite divergent. He expresses concern at the little offered.
Generators suggest that more could be offered if FERC could be more flexible
on terms (FERC required 24/7 offers).
IOUs and others press judge to seek offers from others not present (e.g.,
BPA, other marketers, SW utilities), but judge does not offer to do so.
Barkovich says can't throw large customers into non-core market now.
Everyone agrees that we are all looking for a blended wholesale rate (part
existing gen, part OFs, part forward contract and part spot) that meshes with
the IOUs' ability to recover the costs in rates -- so tied to CPUC rate
increase.
Discussion of CPUC PD -- not enough
Enron able to take low profile.
SDG&E suggested terminating the settlement talks at FERC, saying nothing
could be achieved.
Not much happens until 4:30 pm, when judge blows up -- judge directed
epithets at SDG&E and SCE. SCE had refused to cooperate from the beginning.
Out of the Room
Separate talks between PG&E and SDG&E and some of the generators.
Late in the day, Judge meets with IOUs.
Parties agree informally that forum does not work well given lack of CPUC
involvement, but some believe that FERC is only hope for a workable
resolution.
Next Steps -- The Judge Speaks
Judge asked everyone to consider how to "Share the Pain" for Thursday's
meeting and said not to expect any "win:win" scenario. His view is that FERC
is better than the CA legislature or bankruptcy court.
His focus will be on Wolak proposal to share the pain, as submitted in
12/1/00 comments to FERC -- forces all sellers to CA to sell most of its
supply (either generation or marketer offers) as cost-based rates in forward
contracts, or lose ability to sell at market-based rates. Generators oppose
this, I believe.
Enron planning to continue low profile but to discuss options with ENA.
=====================================
|
4,467 |
Subject: Market structure group
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/373.
=====================================
I must be working off the wrong group list, but I don't think you were on it
and Jeff Dasovich was on it and didn't know he was. Anyway here is the mail
I sent out to kick things off the week before last and I'd welcome your
thoughts on how we might get the best out of the group.
Meeting in London is fine with me if you can all make it! In the meantime,
it's probably worth having a conference call to discuss how we might do
things.
Loved Mr Woychick's comments about Philip by the way. I've always thought he
was a prima donna and it was nice to hear Eric confirm it.
Cheers
Paul
---------------------- Forwarded by Paul Dawson/LON/ECT on 28/02/2000 13:35
---------------------------
Paul Dawson
18/02/2000 14:27
To: Structure Group
cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Mark
Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Fiona Sayers/LON/ECT@ECT, Philip Davies/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Market structure group
My apologies for not kicking things off earlier, but the regulator here has
conspired to make the last few weeks a bit mad. Consequently, it's taken me
a while to set down some thoughts on how we might get the best out of the
market structure group. Attached below is an initial stab at some "terms of
reference" to describe the scope and objectives of the group. I thought this
might help us to come to a common understanding of what we are trying to
achieve. I'm conscious that the one area that is a bit lacking is
"Deliverables", ie, what will we come up with as the output from this
process? This needn't be a formal "report" - indeed I suspect that
establishing a regular process of information exchange and discussion is
likely to provide more durable benefits.
I'd very much welcome your views on our scope and objective over the next few
days. I'd also welcome a brief update on which issues you are all working as
a way introducing our interest in the topic of market structure. This should
also help to kick-start the process of exchanging ideas. My own contribution
is below.
I've also attached a couple of documents that I think may be useful. One I
prepared for the Federal Energy Commission in Russia as a statement of "What
is a foreign investor looking for in a liberalised market?" It was written
for an audience for whom a competitive electricity market is an alien
concept. For example, we were attempting to change the FEC's mindset that
power marketers were an unnecessary layer of costs - because their "tariff"
added to other participants tariffs would increase prices. As a result it is
very high level and conceptual. However, it has some value as a basic
delineation of where the key market structure issues lie. The other
documents relate to the proposals for New Trading Arrangements in England and
Wales (further information on these reforms can be obtained from the
regulator's website at http://www.ofgas.gov.uk/). While far from perfect,
these reforms provide a good example of wholesale trading arrangement reform
for use elsewhere (for good or bad).
I'll be on vacation next week, but on my return I'd like to set up a video
conference/conference call to discuss how we can take things further. Any
suggestions for agenda items for that would be most welcome.
Regards
Paul
------------------------------------------
UK Electricity
The regulators - Ofgem and the DTI are is undertaking a massive programme of
reforming the electricity market in England and Wales. These reforms have
followed the UK government's moratorium on new gas plant in late 1997 and are
designed to remove perceived "distortions" in the market. The reforms centre
on:
New Electricity Trading Arrangements (NETA) to replace the Pool from October
this year. We have had a significant input into the this process. While
generally supportive of the proposals, we have opposed several undue
restrictions on managing risk.
Plant divestment by major mid-merit generators to increase competition in the
price-setting part of the market. We were instrumental in this process,
following our analysis late in 1997 of the costs of generator market power to
electricity consumers. Divestment has since significantly increased the
liquidity and competition in the wholesale market. Despite this the
regulator is seeking greater powers to intervene in the wholesale market to
prevent market "manipulation". We think this represents an unacceptable
extension of regulatory power and are therefore likely to oppose the
regulator at the Competition Commission enquiry into this.
New transmission access and pricing arrangements. While these reforms may
have limited merit, in general we think they're a waste of time and our
existing asset positions are significantly exposed. The regulator has just
started consulting on this and this is one area that I suspect your
experiences in the US and elsewhere might be useful to me.
=====================================
|
4,468 |
Subject: [Fwd: Environmental Comments on Working Draft]
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'Mike Florio" <[email protected]', '[email protected]', 'Phil Isenberg" <[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12551.
=====================================
Attached is an email from John White, which I received after finishing
the merged comments this evening.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from mx7.quiknet.com ([207.183.249.87]) by a-k.a-klaw.com with SMTP
(Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id M6XMYC1P;
Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:33:28 -0700
Received: (qmail 63148 invoked by uid 41); 14 Jun 2001 04:33:40 -0000
Received: from 68.95.fo.dsl.quiknet.com (HELO WORKSTATION02) (207.231.95.68)
by mx7.quiknet.com with SMTP; 14 Jun 2001 04:33:40 -0000
Message-ID: <005c01c0f488$421efab0$6800a8c0@WORKSTATION02>
From: "V. John White" <[email protected]>
To: "Evelyn Kahl" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Phil Isenberg" <[email protected]>, "Mike Florio" <[email protected]>
Subject: Environmental Comments on Working Draft
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:12:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
After reviewing the last draft, my environmental colleagues and I would like
to offer the following comments and suggestions for consideration by the
group as part of a final document:
1. The proposal should include an additional environmental
stewardship component focussing on the disposition and management of
environmentally sensitive SCE landholdings and the operation of the hydro
facilities. We will follow up with specific language when needed:
a. Lands: At a minimum, commitments regarding SCE's lands should match
what SCE already agreed to in the MOU with the Governor.
Environmentalists and key legislators believe we should improve upon the
MOU, and have urged these
commitments be expanded to include additional lands (as inventoried by the
Resources Agency) and improved protections.
b. Hydro Operations: In addition, the proposal should incorporate
explicit commitments to restore aquatic environments harmed by hydro
operations. The MOU SCE signed with CHRC (and others) in late 1999 could
provide a template here.
To address concerns about energy impacts of restoring flows,
implementation could be conditioned on restoration of a healthy reserve
margin (as specified in section 1.2 of the current document).
(3). Consider adding to section 2 a requirement that customers over 200 kW
who elect to stay in the core must be on real time pricing rates. Thanks to
a generous allocation of public funds, these customers will all soon
have the meters and software that can support RTP. This term could be
conditioned on a requirement that the rate be structured so that with RTP
they would pay no more than they would under current rates (including new
adders applied as part of the deal) if they continued current usage
patterns.
Alternatively a tariff could be structured for them that provides a
certain share of energy at the avg. core price but subjects incremental
consumption to the core's marginal procurement cost (which would not
necessarily always be the spot price). If the CEC's
program to install real time meters is expanded down to smaller customers,
this requirement could be extended to them.
(4). We found the following terms/phrases were ambiguous, and seek
clarification:
a. Section 2.3- what is meant by "backstop" spot market purchases- is SCE
buying spot energy and reselling it to the customer at cost, so that other
customers' exposure to spot prices does not increase? Is a real-time
pricing mechanism for such purchases envisioned?
b. Section 3.1.1.1 What is the "time-of-use feature" mentioned in the
last sentence?
c. Section 3.1.1.3 implies that SCE will be back in the power plant
building business. Are they required to build new capacity to meet load
growth, or can they contract out for it? Is any transparent, publi process
envisioned to ensure that SCE's planning and procurement
activities are prudent and timely?
d. Section 5. Does this provision overturn the CPUC's adoption of the
TURN accounting rule? One reading of the definition of Net Undercollected
Amount in the MOU is that it is calculated based on the TCBA w/o netting
against the TRA.
e. Section 5.1. Mike Florio's bracketed comment seems to imply that
there will be a new rate freeze for (core) customers under 20 kW-- true?
f. Does "customer specific generation" ((SEction 8) refer only to cogen
or does this term also encompass distributed generation?
How will the customer specific generation be integrated with the
distribution and transmission grid if there is no jurisdiction by the PUC
and the ISO?
Shouldn't the value of the self generation to the distribution and
transmission system be the critical factor in determining eligibility for
subsidy by ratepayers or taxpayers?
Ralph Cavanagh has some additional concerns with this section, and will be
forwarding some specific suggestions.
=====================================
|
4,469 |
Subject: Fwd: UPDATE 1-New energy moves by W.House before Bush-Davis meet
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'Aryeh Fishman" <[email protected]', 'Andrea Settanni', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2866.
=====================================
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:17:15 -0500
From: "Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]>
To: "Justin Long" <[email protected]>
Cc: "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]>, "Neil Giles" <[email protected]>, "Paul
Fox" <[email protected]>, "Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>, "Scott
Segal" <[email protected]>
Subject: UPDATE 1-New energy moves by W.House before Bush-Davis meet
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
FYI
UPDATE 1-New energy moves by W.House before Bush-Davis meet
WASHINGTON, May 28 (Reuters) - On the eve of a showdown meeting on
California's power crisis between California Gov. Gray Davis and President
George W. Bush, the Bush administration on Monday moved to help ease the
crisis.
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham unveiled plans to boost extra transmission
capacity in California, which he said would be a "big step" in easing rolling
power blackouts.
Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration -- an Energy Department
arm responsible for marketing electricity from federal water projects in 15
Western states -- to wrap up planning for building extra transmission
capacity.
The move came as Bush headed to California for his first presidential visit,
and a critical meeting on Tuesday in Los Angeles with the Democratic governor.
Davis will ask Bush to impose wholesale electricity price controls and order
refunds for overcharged consumers, aides said, but the White House on Monday
reiterated Bush's position that such steps would be counterproductive.
Davis spokesman Steven Maviglio said the steps announced by Abraham were not
new and were not the kind of help California needed to meet its immediate
crisis. "That's been kicked around for a while," he said.
Davis said last week he was prepared to "go to court" if Bush failed to act.
"The law says we're entitled to relief and it hasn't been coming," Davis said.
White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said that while Bush had "worked very
hard" to help California, through measures such as ordering the Defense
Department to reduce its energy use by 10 percent in California and easing
rules for using backup power generators, price controls "make the problem
worse."
TRANSMISSION BOTTLENECK
At issue in Abraham's order is so-called Path 15, an 84-mile stretch of power
lines with insufficient capacity to carry the necessary load between southern
California and the northern part of the state, especially during peak hours.
Abraham told WAPA to determine whether outsiders were interested in financing
and co-owning a new transmission line. "The level of interest will be a
factor in the decision to build the line later this year," the Energy
Department said in a statement.
The statement did not make clear whether the federal government would go
ahead with the project in the absence of outside financing, nor did it give
cost details.
It said WAPA, which manages nearly 17,000 miles of transmission lines, would
prepare the necessary environmental and feasibility studies and review
easement and land acquisition issues.
LEADERSHIP ROLE
"The Bush administration is taking a leadership role in addressing a
long-neglected problem in California's electricity transmission system,"
Abraham said. "California's electricity problems developed over a period of
years and cannot be solved overnight. However, we can move now on actions
that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after
year.
"Removing the so-called Path 15 bottleneck is a big step in the right
direction," he said.
The Energy Department said a new line could transmit across the state an
additional 1,500 megawatts of electricity, enough to power 1.5 million homes.
Planning for additional transmission in the Path 15 area was started in the
mid-1980s.
California's energy crisis is rooted in a flawed 1996 deregulation plan that
allowed wholesale power prices to soar while capping retail rates.
The result has brought rolling blackouts, spotty power supplies and put
intense pressure on Davis to come up with ways to solve a worsening energy
crunch that has also drained billions of dollars from state coffers.
It has also energized potential opposition to Davis's expected 2002
reelection bid. Bush has encouraged Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan to
challenge Davis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Copyright , 2001 Reuters Limited
=====================================
|
4,470 |
Subject: Close to final
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/7809.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 12/18/2000 09:12 AM -----
=09Lara Leibman@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
=0912/17/2000 12:39 PM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: Close to final
fyi -- here's the latest. =20
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/Enron Communications on 12/17/00 12:44 PM=
=20
-----
=09INTERNAL NEWSROOM
=09Sent by: EBS Announcements
=0912/14/00 07:30 PM
=09Please respond to Connected Comments
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: All EBS Worldwide
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: Close to final
Close of Market 12.14.00
=09 76 1/2 +2
=09
JUST IN TIME FOR THE HOLIDAYS ... ENTERTAINMENT ON DEMAND
On December 15, EBS will begin delivering movies via the Blockbuster=20
Entertainment On-Demand (EOD) service in Seattle, New York, Portland, Ore.=
=20
and Salt Lake City, Utah. The initial phase of the Entertainment On-Demand=
=20
service will allow nearly 1,000 customers to select and view movies on-dema=
nd=20
from their televisions. (Click here for more details)
Bandwidth Intermediation
=20
YTD Transactions 139
Counterparties 25
As of 11.30.00
CONNECTED'S NEW GROOVE
Welcome to the redesigned Connected, EBS' biweekly electronic newsletter. =
=20
The new format provides you more news about what's going on at EBS through=
=20
headlines and highlights within your Lotus Notes. For certain topics,=20
hotlinks will bring you directly to in depth and timely articles posted on=
=20
wEBSource. In addition to a feature article, each issue of Connected will=
=20
include recurring columns so you can scan it quickly for the news that=20
interests you. "Business Buzz" highlights deals being done and other=20
business-related information; "Minds & Matters" features news about the=20
development of our people and products; "In the News" links you to recent=
=20
media and analyst coverage of EBS; "Facts & Figures" provides the latest=20
numbers on important EBS matrices; and "Events & Happenings" updates you on=
=20
training opportunities, conferences, and employee functions. Send question=
s,=20
comments or story ideas for Connected to INTERNAL NEWSROOM
MADONNA FOR THE MASSES
On November 28, MSN streamed the much anticipated Madonna concert. Enron=20
Broadband Services was selected to be one of the streaming providers for th=
is=20
event. There were more than 21,000 simultaneous streams delivered, with mo=
re=20
than 12,150 unique users viewing the concert over the Enron Network. This=
=20
was one of the largest single-day events EBS has streamed.
LET'S TALK TRADING=20
The EBS Mid Markets Trading group has broken out of stealth mode and is=20
spreading the word about its services. The group has created a weekly=20
newsletter as well as marketing brochures and collateral. The newsletter i=
s=20
sent to their customers showing indicative market pricing for that week. =
=20
They hope that the newsletter will educate and entice potential=20
counterparties by providing a sample of routes and products and answering=
=20
questions about EBS. The newsletter's "Topic/Highlights" section explains=
=20
the EBS business model and provides trading and risk management definitions=
. =20
Click here to access the newsletter. =20
Trading's new marketing materials include fact sheets highlighting Pooling=
=20
Points and Bandwidth Products. An IPNet Connect data sheet has also been=
=20
created. E-mail the trading group at =01+EBS Trading=01, for any questions=
or=20
comments on the newsletter or collateral pieces.
=20
AWARDS AND ACCOLADES
- Jeff Skilling was featured on the cover of a recent issue of Computer=20
World. Click here to read the story First to Market.
- EBS Trading is highlighted in Risk Magazine. Click here to read about Th=
e=20
Trillion Dollar Question.
- Fool.com features an article on the power of Enron as a market maker. =20
Click here to read Schwab and Enron Manage the Internet
- Enron was honored at the 2000 FT Energy Global Awards:
- Energy Company of the Year: Enron (Other nominees included Duke, Reliant=
,=20
Southern and Tractebel)
- Boldest Successful Investment Decision: Enron Online
=20
UPCOMING TRAINING
A Bottom-Line Project Leadership Seminar will be offered January 8 - 10,=20
2001. This two and a half day seminar is designed for project managers who=
=20
lead cross-functional teams on complex projects. Click here for more=20
details.
HOLIDAY TIDINGS
EBS holiday parties were a smashing success. Enjoy a small sampling of the=
=20
fun had by some EBS employees in Houston and Portland. (Sorry London, your=
=20
pictures aren't ready yet -- but we heard that your James Bond/Charlie's=20
Angels theme was a big hit!)
EBS Portland Holiday Party
EBS Houston Holiday Party
HOLIDAY TIME
Enjoy your time off during the holidays. Enron offices will be closed:
- Monday, December 25, 2000
- Tuesday, December 26, 2000
- Monday, January 1, 2001
=09
=09
--
=====================================
|
4,471 |
Subject: California Lawmakers Eye Billing Businesses for Edison Rescue
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4789.
=====================================
FYI. Did we talk to Leopold? Might be useful to stress that that under
noncore/core (like Direct Access), customers choose from among a host of
competing providers for their service, not just Enron.
Best,
Jeff
California Lawmakers Eye Billing Businesses for Edison Rescue
By Jason Leopold
?
18:00 ET
Dow Jones Business News
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
Dow Jones Newswires
LOS ANGELES -- California lawmakers are mulling yet another set of ideas for
rescuing embattled Southern California Edison, and this time businesses would
be on the hook.
In an attempt to deflect charges of a bailout that have thus far stymied
efforts to restore the utility to solvency, legislators are now considering
ways to shift the burden of financing the rescue from residential ratepayers
to the state's largest businesses, aides to key state lawmakers said this
week.
The ideas being worked over by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, Assembly
Speaker Robert Hertzberg and Assemblyman Fred Keeley have yet to take shape
as formal proposals. But an aide to Burton said some key lawmakers are so
"desperate" to keep Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California
Edison from following PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric into
bankruptcy court that they are willing to consider anything that will takse
residential consumers out of the equation.
"The idea is that the large industrial customers are the ones who pushed for
deregulation in the first place, so they should be responsible for bailing
out Edison," the aide said. "We're looking to take the burden off of
residential ratepayers."
The premise of a plan discussed by lawmakers on a conference call Thursday is
to designate Southern California Edison's largest commercial ratepayers as
non-core customers. Those customers -- some 3,600 users of more than 500
kilowatt-hours a month -- would be responsible for financing the cost of
power the utility must purchase or have purchased for it in the wholesale
market. The non-core customers would also help the utility recoup most of its
$5.5 billion in unrecovered power costs through a surcharge on their bills.
Core residential customers would be protected from the wholesale power market
as the primary beneficiaries of the low-cost power the utilities generate
themselves or have locked up in long-term contracts.
Enron Pushing Access to Customers
Separately, Enron Corp. (ENE) has been lobbying lawmakers for several weeks
to win approval to sign power-supply contracts with Southern California
Edison's largest commercial customers, leaving the utility to serve just its
residential customers and small businesses, aides to Gov. Gray Davis, Messrs.
Burton and Hertzberg said.
An Enron executive confirmed that the company sent a four-page proposal to
Mr. Hertzberg proposing that Southern California Edison's large industrial
customers sign so-called direct-access contracts with Enron. Enron also has
recently made a presentation about direct access to some members of the
California Chamber of Commerce.
Under the proposal, heavy users would be required to contract directly with
companies like Enron for their power.
Direct access was a key part of the state's 1996 deregulation plan, but was
scrapped early this year when the state started buying wholesale power in
place of the utilities.
The core/non-core proposal is one of several being discussed by lawmakers as
alternatives to a memorandum of understanding Mr. Davis struck with Edison in
April. The MOU -- which doesn't vary much from an agreement in principle
reached in February -- has been called dead on arrival by some lawmakers, who
have been mulling various alternatives rather than moving the agreement
forward.
State Sen. Debra Bowen, a Redondo Beach Democrat and chairwoman of the Senate
energy committee, said there are so many "Plan B's" floating around the
Legislature that, "We're going to need to hire an apiculturist."
Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for the governor, said the Davis administration
is still dedicated to seeing legislation to enact the memorandum of
understanding move through the Legislature, but said separating the utility's
"core and non-core" customers would be at the forefront of new discussions.
It was too early to say whether the governor would support the plan, he said.
Dominic DiMare, a lobbyist with the California Chamber of Commerce, said the
chamber has told the Davis administration that shifting the burden of the
Southern California Edison bailout to businesses is "a very bad idea" that
could cost the state billions of dollars in economic activity.
"This [plan] would really screw businesses," Mr. DiMare said. "We just got
hit with a 50 to 90% rate increase. We're dangerously close to losing our
businesses to other states."
Write to Jason Leopold at [email protected]
Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
=====================================
|
4,472 |
Subject: Re: SCE Advice Filing on PX Credit -- Protest
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Sue Mara (E-mail)', '[email protected]', 'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)" <[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11354.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001 04:28 PM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
04/20/2001 04:25 PM
To: Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, JBennett <[email protected]>, Leslie
Lawner/HOU/EES@EES, Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON,
[email protected]
Subject: Re: SCE Advice Filing on PX Credit -- Protest
Looks good, Scott. One thing: I admit I'm not a lawyer, so someone needs to
show me the precise language in AB 1890 that 1) requires the credit (which, I
believe was created by the PUC, not the legislature) to be based on market
and 2) requires DA customers to be indifferent to be from DA suppliers.
Mike Day: Do you concur with Scott's interpretation in AB 1890?
Like your arguments, Scott. Just want to clarify that we're on solid legal
ground before putting the arguments foreward in a brief and/or protest.
Best,
Jeff
Scott Stoness@EES
04/20/2001 10:46 AM
To: JBennett <[email protected]> @ ENRON
cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Leslie
Lawner/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: SCE Advice Filing on PX Credit -- Protest
We should protest this issue and argue that nothing should change but that
the Px credit should be based on DJ-NP15 and DJ-SP15 rather than the defunct
Px because AB1890 requires it to be based on market (not costs). Changing to
procured energy is inconsistent with the law AB1890 which requires DA
customers to be indifferent to buying from DA suppliers.
And since DA suppliers face costs close to DJ-NP15/SP15, that is the only
appropriate available method.
Further, the issue of how to calculate Px is interrelated to whether DA
customers should be charged the generation surcharges ($10 +$30). DA
customers should be given market based Px credits (based on DJNP15/SP15)
because its the law. There are 2 possible interpretations resulting from the
combination of AB1890 and the new law.
The DA customers should get a market based Px credit and not pay any
surcharge.
The DA customers should get a market based Px credit and pay the $30 + $10
surcharges
Interpretation 1 results in DA customers getting lower rates than all other
customers. It seems unlikely that the legislation would have this intent.
Interpretation 2 results in DA customers getting the same rate as all other
customers until the end of AB1890. This seems like the likely interpretation
since otherwise the new legislation would have repealled AB1890. Thus given
that the DA customers are being held indifferent to frozen rates plus $40,
they should get a Px market based credit plus pay the surcharge until the
rate freeze ends.
Once the Px credit ends (Mar 2002), the surcharge should end because the law
(AB1890) no longer requires them to be held at frozen rates and because:
Any customer that is being served by a supplier other than DWR and the
utility is not causing any costs for DWR or the utility therefore they should
not be charged for them.
In the event that Px credit is not set based on market value (if the courts
interpret the law differently than Enron) then there should be no generation
surcharge for DA customers.
This is the same argument we should make in our brief on rate setting
Scott
JBennett <[email protected]> on 04/20/2001 09:03:06 AM
To: "Harry Kingerski (E-mail)" <[email protected]>, "Robert
Neustaedter (E-mail)" <[email protected]>, "Scott Stoness
(E-mail)" <[email protected]>, "Tamara Johnson (Business Fax)"
<IMCEAFAX-Tamara+20Johnson+40+2B1+20+28713+29+20345-7374@GMSSR.com>
cc: "Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)" <[email protected]>, "Sue Mara (E-mail)"
<[email protected]>
Subject: SCE Advice Filing on PX Credit -- Protest
As you are aware, SCE made an advice filing on April 5th to eradicate the PX
Rate Schedule and Replace it with Schedule PE --Procured Energy. As part of
the filing, SCE proposes to set "on an interim basis" the cost of energy
procurement, for bundled service customers for billing purposes and in the
calculation of the energy credit for direct access customers equal to the
Generation rate component of the Customer's otherwise applicable tariff.
Two primary issues arise from SCE's statement. First what does "interim
basis" mean -- how long will this be in effect. In starts on January 19th,
but it is unclear as to when it would end. Second, and most important. is
what is meant by the Generation rate component. While there is not much
explanation in the April 5 advice letter, in a subsequent advice letter
filed on April 11 (1533-E), SCE set forth "Rate Schedule Specific Generation
Related Rates" which range between five and nine cents.
I have forwarded both the referenced advice letters to you earlier. We need
to protest the change in the PX credit by Wednesday, April 25th. All
thoughts on the matter are welcome.
Jeanne
=====================================
|
4,473 |
Subject: Interconnection Agreement Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Debra', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', 'Kristina Mordaunt/Enron Communications@Enron Communications']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10079.
=====================================
FYI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001
08:05 PM ---------------------------
Mona L Petrochko
03/16/2001 06:31 PM
To: Fred Enochs/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Geoffrey
Allen/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Gunnar Frey/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, [email protected], David
Koogler/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Paul Puchot/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Shirley Sidler/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Brian Bradford/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, David Reinfeld/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Tom Madaras/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Kristina Mordaunt/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Debra
Bailey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sue
Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron, Eric
Benson/NA/Enron@ENRON, John
Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: Interconnection Agreement Update
Letters to the ILECs Initiating Formal Negotiation Process
We have submitted letters to Qwest for OR, WA, UT and CO. We already have
a Qwest Representative assigned to us for CO and UT. A letter will go out
Monday (Mar 19) for SBC for TX and IL. Letters will be drafted for PA, DC,
NY, NJ and MA for Verizon and will go out within the next week. We expect
to have a letter go out to Bell South for GA, FL and LA early next week as
well. We are meeting with counsel for SBC-CA and NV and expect to send a
letter for CA early next week. The letter for NV will go out the following
week, as our CLEC filing will be delayed one week. The only other state
where we need to check with Verizon about how they wish to proceed is VA,
as the licensing process is expected to take longer and Verizon may not
negotiate with us until we are closer to receiving approval. We will
update that information early next week.
Review of Interconnection Agreements/Meeting with Outside Counsel
Lara and I will be meeting with all of our outside counsel over the next
two weeks to review agreements that they have forwarded to us and to
identify agreements as candidates for opt-in. We would like to review the
results of those meetings with the negotiating team on April 2 and present
the opt-in candidates. Please indicate your availability for a luncheon
meeting. I would expect the meeting to take up to three hours. After that
meeting, we hope to have identified the contracts that we will use to
negotiate interconnection agreements with the ILECs for purposes of
opting-in.
With the assistance of Eric Benson, GA, we are putting together a database
that will identify the pros/cons of the agreements that we are reviewing.
It will be available to the team on the EBS Government Affairs website.
This will be a tool for internal review as well as charting the progress of
our negotiations on issues with the ILECs.
Addition to the GA Interconnection Negotiation Team
In addition to Lara and me, John Neslage will be joining the EBS Government
Affairs negotiating team. John has been part of the Risk Analytics group,
determining risk exposure to EES/ENA/EBS for entering into particular
deals. John is an attorney with experience with Enron International. His
background and expertise will be a valuable addition to our team.
State Approval of Opt-In Agreements
A question was raised about whether or not we needed to have explicit state
commission approval of an opt-in agreement that has been executed by the
CLEC and the ILEC. Most states do have a process for accepting such
contracts, however, it does not always require an act of the state
commission to become a valid contract. Some states have a protest period,
after which time, if no one raises an objection, the agreement is passively
approved. Oregon, for example, has a 16-day protest period. If no one
protests the agreement within 16 days, the agreement is approved. If
someone does protest, the state has upto 90 days to issue a decision. As
part of the negotiation with the ILEC, we can request that we begin
operation immediately. This is a matter of practice versus process. While
we technically do need to go through the normal process for approval before
the agreement is valid, we can, on an unofficial basis, begin to operate as
though the agreement were approved. This is done because there is a low
likelihood that a protest will be filed against the agreement. We would
want to maintain a low profile about such mutual agreements as certain
state commissions may take exception to such practices. The only other
caution would be that if any disputes were to arise prior to official state
commission approval, we would not have recourse to complain to the state
commission about the ILEC's behavior. While the states have up to 90 days
to approve an agreement, unless they have provisions such as OR, we have
been advised that most approvals will occur within 30 days.
=====================================
|
4,474 |
Subject: Governor Chicken
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/697.
=====================================
October 22, 2001
Review & Outlook
Governor Chicken
The two politicians who've arguably benefited most from the national focus on war are both Californians -- Congressman Gary Condit and Governor Gray Davis. Too bad Mr. Davis is finding he still can't avoid his own chickens coming home to roost.
Only now are the folks in Sacramento learning that their Governor's "solution" to the energy crisis has been a political sham. A combination of collapsing budget revenues, foolish spending and bad credit ratings threatens to plunge the state into a full-fledged financial crisis.
Governor Davis's chickens left the roost back in May 2000, when California's botched scheme to deregulate electric power encountered a wicked price bubble. Wholesale prices, which had been deregulated, shot up, while retail prices, which were still regulated, didn't budge. This mismatch, along with other factors, generated huge supply disruptions and a first-class energy crisis.
The obvious response would have been to let retail rates rise with the market price. Mr. Davis said so himself in his now infamous observation that if he raised rates, the problem would be solved in 20 minutes. Mr. Davis preferred to play the blame game, including a lot of whining that he had inherited the situation.
Fiscal crisis
While the Governor complained, California's two largest utilities were pushed into insolvency and neighboring states endured the double whammy of having their power sucked into California and seeing their electric rates shoot up. Californians suffered through rolling blackouts.
Finally, this past January -- eight months after the energy crisis began -- the Governor responded: Retail rates were increased twice, and the state started to purchase power directly from suppliers, using money from its general fund. At the same time, the state negotiated contracts with suppliers at prices that are now well above market prices and for terms as long as 20 years.
And then Mr. Davis got lucky. Although the forecast was for a summer of continued blackouts generated by a strong demand for power, the disaster failed to materialize. Not only was the weather cooler than normal, but higher rates produced immediate conservation; thus demand was moderate and power sufficient. Newsweek went out and hailed the Governor as a political Lazarus.
But now here come the chickens. It seems that almost one-quarter of California's budget revenues were provided by taxpayers with stock options and capital gains, mostly from Silicon Valley companies. When the dot-com industry started to implode, so did revenue projections -- to $12 billion this year, down from $18 billion last year. And this was before September 11 and the collapse in the Nasdaq market.
California would probably be able to absorb this revenue hit were it not for the still outstanding bills from the Governor's electric power fiasco. Consider the toll:
Somebody is going to have to pay for the $14 billion that the utilities owe to suppliers for power consumed before the state started buying electricity.
Somebody is going to have to repay the $12.5 billion bond issue that California hopes to float to replenish the money borrowed from its general fund.
Somebody is going to have to pay for those expensive, long-term contracts that the state negotiated.
Somebody is going to have to repay the bridge loan of $4.3 billion that California got from the banks hoping to underwrite the bond offering. (If this loan is not repaid by November 1, its interest rate jumps to 7% from 4%, resulting in an extra $250,000 in interest payments a day.)
Whether these bills are ultimately assumed by ratepayers or taxpayers, or some combination of the two, the impact on California's economy and its budget will be dreadful. Observers are estimating a budget deficit of almost $10 billion for next year.
As for Governor Davis, the problems of the "previous administration" are now his own. And Californians know it. A recent statewide poll showed that most voters preferred the former mayor of Los Angeles, Richard Riordan, the leading Republican challenger to Mr. Davis, by several points.
The Governor's response to the ever-worsening economic situation has been typical. He complains. He vetoes a few spending bills. He announces a $5 million campaign to persuade Californians to help the local economy by staying in-state for their vacations. We expect to see a lot of chickens on surfboards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL for this Article:
http://interactive.wsj.com/archive/retrieve.cgi?id=SB1003697699456290360.djm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright ? 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Printing, distribution, and use of this material is governed by your Subscription Agreement and copyright laws.
For information about subscribing, go to http://wsj.com
=====================================
|
4,475 |
Subject: Re: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1080.
=====================================
Jeff/Drew:
Been out all day. Will get a copy. I believe that Jeff's suspicions are
dead on. Given all the investigations regarding electricity "price spikes"
in California, seems very likely that Edison feels the timing is right to
push the gas issue. Will confirm that it is targeted solely at El Paso and
get back to you either way. If there's anything else, just holler. Will keep
you apprised of events as they occur.
Best,
Jeff
Jeffery Fawcett@ENRON
09/05/2000 01:31 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Jeff,
Is it possible for TW to get a copy of the Edison filing at the CPUC? While
the article [shown below] doesn't provide any details, I suspect Edison's
complaint echoes earlier allegations against El Paso regarding their sale of
the 1.2 Bcf/d block of capacity to their affiliate. I don't think
Transwestern and/or Enron affiliate marketing companies are implicated in
this deal at all.
Can you confirm this is an "El Paso only" problem and not something Enron is
being drawn into? I really appreciate your help here.
From: Drew Fossum 09/05/2000 01:17 PM
To: Lorna Brennan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON,
Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine
Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michelle
Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee
Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria
Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Please get copies to me asap of the Edison motion and the CPUC FERC
complaint. Has someone, maybe someone at ENA, already looked at any
allegations about Enron or TW? Please forward these to Kathy Ringblom also
and I'll have her itemize any allegations we might want to repond to.
Thanks DF
ET & S Business Intelligence Department
From: Lorna Brennan on 09/05/2000 09:30 AM
To: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON,
Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine
Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michelle
Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee
Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria
Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew
Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity
Edison Charges Gas Market Manipulation
Southern California Edison filed a motion late last week with the California
Public Utility Commission seeking emergency relief from high spot gas prices
on which its power purchase rates are based. The company told the CPUC that
Southern California Border (Topock, AZ) prices in the last month have risen
by $2.50/MMBtu possibly because of market manipulation, in particular the
withholding off of the market of pipeline transportation capacity between the
supply basins and the California border.
"[T]here is substantial and compelling evidence that the basis differential
has been and continues to be grossly distorted by market power abuse,
collusion and affiliate self dealing of out-of-state gas suppliers and
merchants," Edison told the CPUC.
The company noted the CPUC already has filed a Section 5 complaint with FERC
regarding this issue and is seeking a recision of "certain allegedly
collusive contracts which it contends have permitted out-of-state natural gas
suppliers and their affiliates to drive up artificially California border gas
prices by wrongfully withholding capacity." It notes the complaint
"conservatively estimates that the anti-competitive manipulation of the basis
differential has already damaged California gas and electricity users by $100
million annually since the beginning of 1998."
Edison seeks an expedited order authorizing it to use the posted gas price of
$4.5133/MMBtu, which was applied to SCE's August 2000 avoided cost posting,
to calculate its payment obligations to qualified power producers for the
month of October and every month going forward. It estimated September
bidweek border prices would average $7/MMBtu. If such prices were used in
Edison's September avoided costs posting, its Transition Formula payments to
certain independent power producers will be $29 million more than the month
prior, the company told the CPUC. "No mechanism exists to recapture the
increase in such payments if it is later determined by this commission or in
another forum that the Topock border indices are unreliable at this time."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
=====================================
|
4,476 |
Subject: PPL Montana shows lucrative profit
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4035.
=====================================
I forget. What's the Governor of Montana's position on price caps in the=
=20
West?
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/09/2001 01:27 PM -----
=09Lynnette Barnes
=0904/09/2001 01:15 PM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: Tom Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Bill=
=20
Moore/NA/Enron@Enron, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Frank=20
Rishe/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Daniel=20
Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Ader/HOU/EES@EES, Gloria=20
Ogenyi/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Ma=
ry=20
Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron, Ron McNamara/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry=20
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Stacey=20
Bolton/NA/Enron@Enron, Patrick Keene/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie=20
Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Stella Chan/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,=20
Robert Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Roy=20
Boston/HOU/EES@EES, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, bmerola@newpower@EES,=
=20
Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry=20
Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], gduda@newpower@EES,=20
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],=20
[email protected], [email protected], Amr=20
Ibrahim/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron,=
=20
Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: PPL Montana shows lucrative profit
PPL shows profits in 2000=20
By The Associated Press=20
HELENA (AP) =01) Reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission =
show=20
PPL Montana made handsome profits in the lucrative Western power market in=
=20
2000.=20
PPL Montana owns most of the former Montana Power Co. electric-generating=
=20
plants in the state. In documents filed last month, the company reported=20
$86.7 million in net income for 2000.=20
The bulk of those profits came in the final three months of the year, when=
=20
regional power prices soared to record heights. PPL Montana reported $68.7=
=20
million net income for that period, or more than triple what it earned the=
=20
first nine months of the year.=20
PPL Montana also made these profits despite its obligation to supply 285,00=
0=20
Montana Power Co. customers with relatively cheap power, under a contract=
=20
that expires next year.=20
Company officials said that since PPL Montana acquired the facilities in=20
December 1999, the company has sold about 69 percent of the power generated=
=20
to Montana Power Co. and other marketers for resale for end use in Montana.=
=20
Power left over after supplying the MPC customers is sold on the open marke=
t=20
to suppliers, who sell inside and outside Montana, resulting in its most=20
lucrative profits.=20
The power that PPL Montana sells to the Montana Power residential and small=
=20
business customers is priced at about $22.25 per megawatt hour (mwh). Sales=
=20
in the unregulated regional market are anywhere from $75 to $300 per mwh or=
=20
higher.=20
PPL Montana=01,s marketing division has refused to offer power to any Monta=
na=20
customers at below-market prices, as have other marketers.=20
Some have said if PPL Montana made $87 million last year while supplying MP=
C=20
customers at $22.25 per mwh, why can=01,t it offer power at $35 to $40 per =
mwh=20
and still make considerable money?=20
PPL director of corporate communications Dan McCarthy said it=01,s not that=
=20
simple. He said other factors may influence sales and production, including=
a=20
low-water season this year, which would reduce the output of hydroelectric=
=20
plants and force the company to buy power on the open market to supply its=
=20
customers.=20
=01&You can=01,t extrapolate these numbers and say we=01,d make double (the=
profits)=20
at double the price,=018 he said.=20
He also said last year=01,s $87 million in profits is little more than a 10=
=20
percent return on the company=01,s $800 million investment in the power pla=
nts =01)=20
about the same return made by Montana Power on its formerly regulated asset=
s.=20
However, a Montana mining executive who=01,s been following PPL Montana=01,=
s=20
finances said last week that a 10 percent return after profits is a very go=
od=20
return.=20
Greg Stricker, president of Montana Resources Inc. in Butte, also noted tha=
t=20
the high market prices for electricity that helped PPL triple its profits i=
n=20
the final quarter of last year are still in effect, and are expected to sta=
y=20
high this year.=20
If the company=01,s profits for the fourth quarter of 2000 are spread over =
a=20
year, PPL Montana would see a $275 million profit, or a return of 30 percen=
t=20
to 35 percent on investment, Stricker said.=20
As part of its expenses, PPL Montana reported spending nearly $92 million t=
o=20
buy power on the market to fulfill its supply contracts. However, that amou=
nt=20
did not increase markedly in the final quarter of last year.=20
=====================================
|
4,477 |
Subject: Re: Challenge to exercise of Eminent Domain - Confidential Attorney
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'Mercy', '[email protected]', 'Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES', 'Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5408.
=====================================
Ron -
If you have any conclusions on this, please get to Jeff Dasovich. He is
calling Mike Peevey to try and get CDWR to take over the contracts fully
(including our LCs).
Jim
"Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>
02/07/2001 03:54 PM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Re: Challenge to exercise of Eminent Domain - Confidential Attorney
WorkProduct
Mary, I like your points about the state being without jurisdiction over the
BFM contracts (without commenting on whether such arguments would be better
made at FERC or Dist. Ct. or both venues). We would need to research those
arguments to see if they hold up. Ron
>>> <[email protected]> 02/05/01 11:18AM >>>
Good point.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 02/05/2001 08:29
AM ---------------------------
Steve C Hall
02/05/2001 08:16 AM
To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Challenge to exercise of Eminent Domain - Confidential
Attorney Work Product (Document link: Mary Hain)
I think it may also be significant that the governor exercised his
authority over contracts, as opposed to real property. Who ever heard of
the state "condemning a contract?"
(Embedded
image moved
to file: From: Mary Hain
pic15881.pcx) 02/03/2001 03:50 AM
To: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shelia Benke/Corp/Enron@Enron, Donald M- ECT
Origination Black/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rick
Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andre Cangucu/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mike
Grigsby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary
Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve C Hall/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Keith Holst/HOU/ECT@ect, Robert
Johnston/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Travis
McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gordon
Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Shari Stack/HOU/ECT@ECT,
James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Stephen
Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mitchell Taylor/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Michael
Tribolet/Corp/Enron@Enron, Robert Williams/ENRON@enronxgate, Greg
Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Christian
Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected], [email protected],
andrea settanni
cc: Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Mercy
Gil/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lysa
Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Joseph
Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Janette Elbertson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernadette
Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Purswell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Rubena
Buerger/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Dolores
Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lora
Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Twanda Sweet/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Iris
Waser/HOU/EES@EES, Jan M King/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marcia A
Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Esmeralda
Hinojosa/HOU/EES@EES, Kathryn Sheppard/PDX/ECT@ECT, Rosario
Boling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Emy Geraldo/NA/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie
Truss/NA/Enron@ENRON, Anna Mehrer/PDX/ECT@ECT
Subject: Challenge to exercise of Eminent Domain - Confidential Attorney
Work Product
Although I don't yet have all the facts, Steve Hall said that late
yesterday (Friday) afternoon, the Governor exercised eminent domain over
the IOU forward contracts that the PX had been in the process of auctioning
to pay PX participants. I would like Bracewell to research at least the
following two possible ways this action is unlawful. First, this violates
the banking provisions of the PX tariff (Section 6). These provisions
requires the PX to hold all PX accounts in trust for PX participants.
Second, these are wholesale contracts and the State only has the right to
exercise eminent domain concerning retail service. I don't have any law to
support the second idea but think it should be researched nonetheless.
=====================================
|
4,478 |
Subject: FW: S&P News on California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4624.
=====================================
fyi: this is rather out of the ordinary for S&P
-----Original Message-----
From: Conwell, Wendy
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 10:08 AM
To: Bradford, William S.; Ngo, Tracy; Tribolet, Michael
Subject: S&P News on California
Research: Return to Regular Format California Power Crisis: Bring In the
Feds Publication Date: 30-Mar-2001 Analyst: Todd A Shipman, CFA, New
York (1) 212-438-7676
In one of the Sherlock Holmes stories, the key clue in solving the
mystery was a dog that did not bark. In a similar vein, as analysts analyze
and experts pontificate on the electricity crisis in California, as well as
its causes and solutions, there seems to be an obvious point that few, if
any, are mentioning. That is, that the problem is not really confined to
California, but is at the very least a regional issue and, in reality, is
tied to a national industry. As such, the whole question of the current
and future direction of electricity deregulation is a federal matter with
important economic, environmental, and even national security implications,
and therefore Standard & Poor's believes it ought to be addressed at the
federal level. Instead, just like the dog that did not bark, no one in
Washington, D.C. seems to be willing to step in and take the lead in
resolving the California crisis, or the bigger issue of electric
restructuring. This state versus federal jurisdictional issue did arise in
early discussions of electric deregulation, and there were some calls for a
larger role by the federal government. But the states were able to protect
their long-standing place as the primary regulators of the electric industry,
and so Congress and the FERC backed off, and let the states take the lead in
directing the restructuring of the electric utility industry, even though
they started the whole deregulation ball rolling with the Energy Policy Act
of 1992. The establishment of the act contrasted greatly with the
introduction of more competition into utility industries overseas, and the
natural gas industry here in the U.S., where a more centralized approach was
taken. After some sporadic attempts by Congress to address some electric
utility issues, they seemed to have given up trying to fashion a
comprehensive solution to deregulation of the electric utility industry.
Their inaction is echoed nicely by the desultory and curiously laissez-faire
attitude displayed by the FERC, where even something as important and clearly
jurisdictional as the transmission grid has been handled with all the speed
and dispatch of a tortoise race. Why should the administration or Congress
(both, ironically, in the hands of Republicans) presume to step in and usurp
the states? As the situation in California has revealed, the electric
industry is very much connected, both figuratively and literally, and the
actions of one state can and most likely will affect its neighbors. In other
words, California sneezed and the rest of the western grid caught the cold.
And it is not just the initial design of the restructuring scheme that can
lead to lower credit quality and other problems. In California, we were
treated to the spectacle of that state steadfastly refusing to timely deal
with its problems (the Public Utilities Commission only last week belatedly
raised retail rates) while the rest of its neighbors were forced to pass
through significant rate hikes to keep their own utilities whole to deal with
price spikes caused partly by California. Despite the increases, the
situation has had negative implications for the credit ratings of several of
those utilities. The precedent for a strong federal role, and a good
analogy as well, is securities regulation. The prominent, and almost
exclusive role of the federal SEC in monitoring and regulating the securities
industry came about in the 1930s, after the severe economic downturn that was
preceded by the Crash of 1929. It was recognized that despite the presence of
state regulators, the nature of the industry and the need for uniformity
across the nation meant that Washington had to get involved and take the
lead. The banking industry is another example of where the economic stakes
are high, and a nationwide perspective is needed to protect the common
good. We are faced with the same type of situation with electric
utilities. The California crisis has shown us that strong and active
oversight is needed, a comprehensive approach to both the restructuring and
the subsequent degree of regulation must be taken, and that the states are
not willing or capable of organizing their activities to achieve the
necessary coordination. The initiative should now come from either the Bush
administration or Congress to take control of the process, and develop a
thorough plan for industry restructuring. Copyright , 1994-2001
Standard & Poor's. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy
=====================================
|
4,479 |
Subject: RE: Updated Core/Non-Core Analysis
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12710.
=====================================
I agree that the plug T&D figures look too high. Chip Schneider and I were
looking at another way, and they look too high.
Here is a revised chart (to include looking at the relative ratio of core/non
core cost). I took the SDGE one up slightly (102%, from 100%) to reflect
the mid-point of Core/non core %. Robert, let me know if you want to adjust
this. I have attached a revised file. Note also that at the bottom I took
the 10-K revenue and kwh, and subtracted the gen portion (per kwh) showing in
the MOU literature as yet another cut. As per usual there is a difference.
PGE SCE SDGE
Core Rate T&D (cents) 4.888 5.250 6.379
Non Core T&D (cents) 2.213 1.783 2.477
All T&D (cents) 3.910 4.200 6.230
Total dollars T&D $ 3,206 $ 3,519 $ 1,072
Core T&D/non core T&D 221% 294% 258%
Core T&D/ All T&D 125% 125% 102%
-----Original Message-----
From: Neustaedter, Robert
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 9:10 AM
To: Tribolet, Michael
Cc: Kingerski, Harry; Steffes, James; Dasovich, Jeff; Soo, Jeffrey A.; Brown,
Kortney
Subject: RE: Updated Core/Non-Core Analysis
I would like to step back to the plug number for T&D and suggest another
method. The plug, as I understand it, is calculated by building up
generation cost from the MOU presentation and substracting that number from
the total utility revenues reflected in the Lynch decision. Unless the
generation component reflected in the MOU and Lynch's decision are the same
(and I don't think they are), this won't result in a proper number.
For PGE, I am very confident that their non-generation costs are equal to
$.0391 per kWh based upon PGE data filed in the rate design hearing. That
rate multiplied by 81,991 results T&D cost of $3,206. I think this is the
number that should be used for PGE. I don't think you should tie to the
$11,400 number. The T&D number would need to be adjusted for the
core/non-core adjustment factor (core = 125% of average).
For SCE, assuming that the system average generation rate is $.073 and that
the existing total system average rate is $.1132, that leaves a
non-generation system average rate of $.042 which equates to total T&D cost
of $3,519. Because the PGE and SCE systems have a similar per unit rate for
T&D (4.02 v 3.91) and the mix between core and non-core are similar I think
using the 125% factor is reasonable for SCE.
Going through similar calculations and assumptions I come up with a T&D per
unit cost of $.0623 for SDGE. Because their mix of core and non-core is
heavily tilted toward core the above factor would not be applicable.
Perhaps, not adjusting it at all would not be too far off.
Call me if you have questions.
Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate 05/18/2001 08:27 AM To: Kortney
Brown/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert
Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeffrey A
Soo/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: RE: Updated Core/Non-Core Analysis
I re-set the Core to Non Core T&D (in cents) ratio (see the bottom of the
spreedsheet for relative cost and attached the spreadsheet) to 200%. As you
can see the analysis is very sensative to this apportionment. Robert and
Harry, any additional ideas about apportioning this would improve the model's
accuracy.
PGE SCE SDGE
Core Rate T&D 5.721 7.240 7.616
Non Core T&D 2.867 3.620 3.809
Total $ 3,836 $ 5,147 $ 1,285
Core T&D/Non Core T&D 200% 200% 200%
By taking PGE's FYE 2000 10-K, I find the following:
Consumer Rev $3008
All Other $3658
Total $6666
Estimated T&D $3836
Gen portion $2830
Consumer Kwh 28,753
Other 53,170
Total 81,923
If 45.1% of revenue is from consumer, and the T&D is estimated at $3836, you
can apportion T&D if you assume gen is apportioned pro-rata:
Consumer Other Total
Gen 993 1837 2830
T&D 2015 1821 3836
Total 3008 3658 6666
T&D (cents)/kwh 7.01 3.42 4.68
<< File: m010508b.xls >>
-----Original Message-----
From: Brown, Kortney
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 6:31 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Neustaedter, Robert; Kingerski, Harry
Cc: Tribolet, Michael; Soo, Jeffrey A.
Subject: Updated Core/Non-Core Analysis
Attached is the revised Core/Non-Core Analysis per our discussion. We have
updated to include the new CPUC rate schedules for PGE and SCE and a toggle
switch 20- year bond scenario to cover the past utility debt that is the
burden of Non-Core. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks.
Kortney
<< File: CoreNonCoreAnalysiswoDWRNewRates.xls >>
=====================================
|
4,480 |
Subject: Re: November 9 FERC Comments
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2981.
=====================================
In answer to your first point, the FERC did exempt demand side bids from the
$150. See footnote No. 84 of the order.
Susan J Mara@ENRON
11/02/2000 01:50 PM
To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, [email protected], Christopher F
Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dave Parquet@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@Enron, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Mona
L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Tim
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: November 9 FERC Comments
Gang,
I didn't get Jim's e-mail but ..... Here are my comments
This looks good as a bottomline message, but I'd like to dress it up and take
it out on a date first (doesn't dasovich talk like this?)
I'm afraid we'll look greedy unless we focus strongly on the RETAIL affect of
the low price cap and how raising it would ultimately allow retail customers
to save money and wholesale markets to work more efficiently. there is some
stuff we can quote in the iso's market surveillance com report. we also have
some real world experience to draw upon (i'm told that FERC occasionally
really likes to hear about the real world) -- we had a number of customers on
demand responsiveness plans in the east and we sent them checks for BIG BUCKS
this summer. To the contrary, in the west, we were working with some
customers (a few hundred MWs) to participate in the ISO's program -- after
the Board voted to lower the cap to $250 -- the customers all said sayonara
-- could no longer justify the expense and the interference in their
operations. These are powerful examples of how price caps influence retail
demand response.
This only goes so far, however...
The FERC could easily eliminate the problem by exempting demand side bids
from the price caps. SO, we need more...
I think we should focus on the practical effects of a "soft" cap (not simple
and not certain) -- and how stable markets need stable price caps -- "soft"
caps are not a stable price and do not send a stable signal for investment in
new generation (the market may never know the real price since it doesn't set
the MCP). The staff report provides some good evidence on why the caps are
too low and we could also use the ISO's calculation of prices for short-term
peaking capacity. Then mention the issues Mary discussed below (information;
cap mechanism bad for power marketers in particular)
Sue
Mary Hain@ECT
11/02/2000 01:03 PM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Dave Parquet, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, [email protected], Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: November 9 FERC Comments
In response to Jim's E-mail - here's is my proposed list of issues for
Enron's November 9 comments. We have to send our issue list to FERC tomorrow
so please comment on this ASAP.
We should discuss price signals including:
price caps and
market information
Here's my rationale. Since we'll only have five to ten minutes to talk, our
comments should focus on the most important commercial issues to us: removing
or improving price caps and improving market transparency by providing market
information to market participants. We could summarize the positions we took
in the white paper about why the Commission shouldn't allow a price cap at
all and why we need information. In addition, we should assume that they
will adopt price caps anyway and may reaffirm their own proposal, so we
should also tell them how the $150 cap will be too low to incent investment
in new generation, how the reporting requirement will create special problems
for power marketers (we don't have marginal costs and the Commission has yet
to determine what opportunity costs are), and how they still have not
addressed the problems created by OOM.
In addition, although I don't think we need to tell FERC this, our comments
could briefly congratulate the Commission for removing the buy/sell
requirement, addressing underscheduling of load, creating independent
governance and directing the ISO to file generation interconnection
procedures. Although our written comments will probably want to discuss any
clarifications of this measures as well as the long term measures the
Commission discussed (reserve requirements, alternate auction mechanisms,
balanced schedules, enhanced market mitigation, congestion management
redesign, demand response programs, RTO development and compliance) our oral
comment time is too precious to use on these issues. In addition, our
written comments will want to beef up the legal support for the Staff's
conclusion about refunds and perhaps request rehearing of the Commission's
decision to move the refund effective date. I'm sure we'll find more issues
as we go.
=====================================
|
4,481 |
Subject: Peter's Picks on wine.com
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5025.
=====================================
In This Email:
Super Sale Gets Even Bigger
Great Wines
Wine and Cheese: A Match Made in Biochemistry
Wine Team Picks: Maire Murphy on Wines to Broaden Your Merlot-Loving
??Friends' Horizons
Super Sale Gets Even Bigger
Even if you've already shopped the wine.com Super Sale once, check it
out again. Because of an amazing response to the event, we've
re-stocked our virtual shelves and marked down more great wines. You
can still save as much as 40 percent and the more you buy, the more
you save. Plus, if you build your own case of single-bottle
selections, you'll receive our 10 percent case discount on top of the
individual sale prices.
Don't miss it. Log onto wine.com and stock your cellar.
To learn more about each item listed below, simply click on its name.
_____________________________________________________________________
Great Wines
1997 Ch. du Cartillon Haut-Medoc Cru Bourgeois, Bordeaux,
France, $14.99
Original Price $18.00
1997 Wakefield Wines Cabernet Sauvignon, Clare Valley, South
Australia, Australia, $14.95
Original Price $18.00
1998 Dom. de la Garreliere Touraine Blanc Cepage Sauvignon, Loire
Valley, France, $9.95
Original Price $12.00
Dom. J. Laurens Cremant de Limoux Blanc de Blancs Brut,
Languedoc-Roussillon, France, $11.00
A crisp sparkling wine that won't break the bank.
1998 d'Arenberg Shiraz Footbolt, McLaren Vale, South Australia,
Australia, $11.95
Original Price $13.95
Good Grips Waiter's Corkscrew, $12.00
Traditional corkscrew with a modernized non-slip grip.
_____________________________________________________________________
Wine and Cheese: A Match Made in Biochemistry
While it's a rule of civilized and culinary thumb that wine and
cheese go together, there are more reasons for it than meet the eye.
Both, for example, are products of fermentation -- wine is fermented
grape juice and cheese is made from fermented milk. Both can express
terroir, or the taste of the place from which they come -- wine
through the roots of grapevines, cheese through the milk of animals
(cows, goats, sheep, water buffalo, even horses and camels) that feed
on local plants. Add their shared ease of preparation, and wine and
cheese indeed go hand in hand -- glass in the right, cheese in the
left, grateful mouth in the middle.
That said, every wine doesn't go with every cheese. No matter how you
slice it, each artisan cheese is unique, and aged Vermont cheddar is
as different from fresh French chevre as Zinfandel is from Champagne.
Exploring this range of sensations and combinations is more than an
excuse to drink wine; it's a veritable (read: delightful) education
for the palate.
Some oenophiles consider Sauvignon Blanc the cheese-friendliest wine
of all. Among reds, the easiest wines to pair with cheese are those
that are light and fruity. Beyond that, terroir-inspired combinations
of wine and cheese from the same region or village are almost
always winners.
When matching wine and cheese, keep a few general rules in mind:
-The whiter and fresher the cheese, the crisper and fruitier
the wine.
-A smooth, fatty cheese can take on a rich wine, but may also provide
a nice backdrop for one that's light and zesty.
-Sweet wine offers a satisfying counterpoint to tart or salty cheese.
(Port and Stilton is a classic). Salty cheeses also sing when
partnered with high-acid wines.
-Fruity red wines suit soft cheeses. Try a Beaujolais with
your chevre.
-Dry sparkling wine is brilliant with a bloomy white rind. Champagne
and brie, anyone?
For more ideas, log onto wine.com, this week featuring tips on
hosting a wine-and-cheese party.
_____________________________________________________________________
Wine Team Picks: Maire Murphy on Wines to Broaden Your Merlot-Loving
Friends' Horizons
Okay, I understand that, for people new to red wine (and, all right,
even some people who aren't), Merlot can taste darn yummy -- soft,
caressing, sensuous, even sweet. Still, I get a kick out of
introducing certain friends, for whom Merlot is the only reliable
red, to the exotic world of Spain and Italy and obscure grapes they
never would have thought to try. As these people slowly wean
themselves from their habitual red to exciting new wines that deliver
many of the same rewards as Merlot (but often at much less expense),
my experience mimics that of subversive instigators throughout
history: initially considered a nuisance, suddenly I find myself
a hero.
1998 Friggiali Rosso di Montalcino, Tuscany, Italy, $17.99
1997 Icardi Barbera d'Alba Suri di Mu, Piedmont, Italy, $15.99
1998 Domaine de la Noblaie Chinon, Loire Valley, France, $9.99
1999 Altos de las Hormigas Malbec, Mendoza, Argentina, $8.49
1995 Bodegas Primicia Rioja Reserva Vina Diezmo, Spain, $19.95
_____________________________________________________________________
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS NEWSLETTER, go to:
http://wine1.m0.net/m/u/vin/vv.asp?e=jdasovic%40enron.com
=====================================
|
4,482 |
Subject: Re: Ohio Telecommunications Legislation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5973.
=====================================
SUe--my understanding of the Ohio legislation is that the narrow definition
is applicable to INCUMBENT local exchange companies and the services that
they provide and that the bill did not take the extra step of extending the
concept to help CLEC's fall under less scrutinty.
You questions/ideas are good ones though. I'm forwarding this email to our
local counsel and Barbara and I will follow up.
Sue Nord
01/01/2001 12:59 PM
To: Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Margo
Reyna/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Ricardo
Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Bolton/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan
M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Re: Ohio Telecommunications Legislation
The idea of using legislation to more narrowly tailor PUC jurisdiction over
the local loop seems promising.
Barbara/Sue: do you know how the various interests have lined up around this
legislation? Did NARUC get involved?
All: If data services were exempt from CLEC licensing requirements, would we
still need to be licensed as a CLEC to sign interconnection agreements with
incumbents? If so, what would have to change to allow us to sign
interconnection agreements (and get wholesale pricing for UNEs) without being
a CLEC?
Susan M Landwehr
12/27/2000 04:55 PM
To: Margo Reyna/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron,
[email protected], Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
Subject: Re: Ohio Telecommunications Legislation
MArgo--as is indicated in the body of the information that you send, the
stated reason for the changes is to more narrowly define LOCAL services so
that other services would fall outside of the more strict regulatory
oversight of the PUC. Specifically they include voice communications, and
take out data and image communications (this is good). However, our
experience so far with the PUCO has not indicated that there is going to be a
whole lot of streamlining as a result of this legislation---they still have
way too many hoops to jump thru as far as we're concerned!
Margo Reyna
12/14/2000 03:30 PM
To: Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Ohio Telecommunications Legislation
Sue,
I found the following in a recent Focus Notes issue dated December 8 from RRA:
"Ohio - Telecommunications Legislation--On December 7, 2000, the Ohio House
passed Substitute Senate Bill (SSB) 235 by a 77-8 vote. SSB 235, if enacted,
would amend current law to redefine the term "basic local exchange service"
for all regulatory purposes. On December 5, 2000, the bill was unanimously
passed by the Senate. SSB 235 will be submitted to Gov. Robert Taft (R), who
has expressed support for the bill. Currently, basic local exchange service
is defined as access to and useage of telephone company-provided facilities
that enable customers, over a local network, to originate or receive voice
grade, data, or image communications. SSB 235 proposes that local exchange
service be redefined as end-user access to and usage of telephone
company-provided services that enable a customer, over the primary line
serving the customer's premises, to originate or receive voice communications
within a local service area. Local exchange service would consist of the
following: local dial tone service; touch tone dialing service; access to
and usage of 911 services; access to operator services and directory
assistance; provision of a telephone directory and a listing in that
directory; per call, caller identification blocking services; access to
telecommunications relay service; and, access to toll presubscription,
interexchange and/or toll providers, and networks of other telephone
companies. Under SSB 235, the Ohio Public Utilites Commission (PUC) would be
able to adopt alternative regulation plans for incumbent local exhange
companies that do not require pricing or earnings restrictions on fully
competitive services, especially on a service such as digital subscriber line
(DSL), which is provisioned through the upper-level spectrum of the local
loop. In addition, the law would change the scope of the PUC's
merger-related authority as it pertains to telecommunications companies.
Under current law, a company must obtain PUC approval prior to its
acquisition of a basic local service provider in Ohio. If the definition of
basic local service becomes more narrowly defined by SSB 235, the PUC's
jurisdiction over certain mergers may be eliminated.
Is this useful, and is it something that we care about?
Margo Reyna
Regulatory Analyst
Enron Corp., Government Affairs
Phone: 713-853-9191
=====================================
|
4,483 |
Subject: CONFERENCE CALL TOPIC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron', 'Rubena', '[email protected]', 'Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT']
File: dasovich-j/sent/1299.
=====================================
OK. You and I are the last ones to get the info....Here it is.
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 02:20 PM -----
Joseph Alamo
12/11/2000 02:18 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron
cc:
Subject: CONFERENCE CALL TOPIC
sorry!
---------------------- Forwarded by Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 12:17
PM ---------------------------
Joseph Alamo
12/11/2000 10:23 AM
To: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Rubena
Buerger/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: CONFERENCE CALL TOPIC
Please note:
On the attached, the subject topic of the referenced conference call should
have been:
"Utility Forward Contracting Proposal."
Sorry for any confusion; all other call data remains the same.
Again, thanks in advance for your participation.
Joseph
---------------------- Forwarded by Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 10:21
AM ---------------------------
Joseph Alamo
12/11/2000 10:02 AM
To: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Rubena
Buerger/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: CONFERENCE CALL CONFIRMATION re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
On behalf of Enron Host Jeff Dasovich, please consider this confirmation
that a conference call has been arranged, on the above-referenced topic,
as noted below:
Date: Monday, December 11th
Time: 3:00 PM PST
Call-in number: 1-877-288-4427
Participants' Code: 217756
Host Code (Jeff) 501722
Thanks in advance for your participation.
Joseph
---------------------- Forwarded by Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 09:58
AM ---------------------------
From: Jeff Dasovich on 12/11/2000 10:31 AM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
Could you please set up a call and distribute to this list? Topic: utility
forward contracting proposal. Time 3-4:30 pm PST. Thanks very much.
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 10:26 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/11/2000 10:20 AM
To: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
The votes have been counted (kidding), and the call will take place today at
3 PM PST. Call-in number to follow.
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 10:19 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/07/2000 12:13 PM
To: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Data on Monthly Generation for SCE
Folks:
The "subcommittee" I've referenced that's trying to come up with a solution
to California's train wreck is moving very quickly. The group's shooting to
have a first cut at a "straw person" proposal sketched out by end of next
week. The group's meeting on Tuesday to continue to bounce around ideas.
I'd like to try to have an internal call on Monday at either 10 AM (PST) or
3 PM (PST) to pin down at least a vaguely detailed conceptual framework that
I can propose to the subcommittee on Tuesday. The agenda items for the
internal meeting are:
Finalize proposal for benchmark(s) for utility procurement.
Goal: increase utility willingness to enter into forward contracts by
replacing PUC after-the-fact "reasonableness" review with a benchmark. (Been
working the Portland desk on a "portfolio benchmark" concept.)
Determine our view of how to treat term contracts w.r.t. the PX credit, i.e.,
should those contracts be disclosed to the market, or should PUC keep them
confidential, calculate the PX credit behind closed doors, and publish the
credit ex poste? The PX credit depends on the overall utility portfolio, not
just the PX price.
Let me know if 10 AM or 3 PM (PST) works better.
Harry: I'll assume that you'll contact the folks from EES that need to
participate.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
4,484 |
Subject: NEWS: rate increases - 1st hearing by CPUC
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12155.
=====================================
* from today's LA Times
* people oppose rate increase plan
* want costs to be spred fairly, evenly
* lights were out in the hearing room to save energy
In 1st Hearing, PUC Urged to Lift Rate Hike
Energy: Speakers call on the agency to rescind the increase approved last
month. Officials caution that they are focusing on "who pays and how much."
By NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writer
The lights were out to save energy in a Santa Monica hearing room, but the
heat was on as consumers and business representatives urged the California
Public Utilities Commission on Monday to spread the pain of rate increases
fairly--but differed substantially on how that could be accomplished.
Many of the more than 30 speakers who appeared at the PUC's first public
hearing on how to design new electricity rates spent their time trying to
persuade the commission to undo the increase of 3 cents a kilowatt-hour,
which was approved March 27 and is expected to begin appearing on bills in
June.
Although Commissioner Henry Duque and Administrative Law Judge Victor Ryerson
listened politely and court reporters took down every word, those fervent
pleas were largely wasted.
Ryerson admonished the audience of about 75 people that the hearing would not
determine whether rate increases are necessary to pay for soaring electricity
costs. That already has been decided by the PUC, he said.
Rather, the series of hearings this week throughout the state, each attended
by one of the five PUC commissioners, will focus on "who pays and how much,"
Ryerson said.
That wasn't what consumer advocate Douglas Heller wanted to hear.
"The PUC is asking the wrong questions," said Heller of the Foundation for
Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. "The question that the PUC
should be asking is: How do we get our state back?"
"Small consumers never asked for deregulation and never benefited from it,"
Heller said. "The innocent victims of this public policy nightmare should not
bear the burden of the energy industry's greed and the governor's failure to
confront it."
About 20 different rate plans have been submitted to the PUC, which is
expected to adopt a rate design at its meeting next Monday. PUC officials
said that rates will rise by an average of 30% but that some customers will
see no increases while some will see much larger increases.
The commission is under tremendous pressure to devise a new rate structure
that encourages conservation but doesn't damage businesses--and to do it in
six weeks rather than the usual six months or longer.
Some who testified Monday in Santa Monica feared that the new rates will
cause families to subsidize single users and will penalize those that are
already conserving electricity.
David Marshall, chief financial officer of El Monte-based Gregg Industries,
asked that the PUC retain lower rates for the hours when electricity use is
lower.
Gregg, which employs 400 people to make heavy iron parts for industry, has
shifted all its production to between midnight and noon, he said. That is the
only way Gregg can continue to compete, Marshall said.
His company does business in the United States, Mexico, Europe and Asia, "and
in every one of those markets we have direct competitors anxious to take
business away from us," Marshall said. "California is not an island."
Encino resident Donald Tollefson argued that consumers should be spared the
brunt of the rate increases because they will be forced to pay twice: for
their own higher electricity rates and in the form of price increases as
businesses pass along their higher energy costs.
"Whatever you do," he said, "you should be fair and compassionate."
About 200 people attended a similar hearing in a dimly lit high school
auditorium in Rosemead.
Bob Wellemin, an air-conditioner mechanic from Temple City, said the
commission should take the blame for not pushing to build more power plants.
"How on Earth have you been representing the consumers?" he said, evoking
applause. "And what I don't understand is that we have three or four meetings
like this ahead. And we got a May 14 deadline to make a decision. I don't
want to sound skeptical. But how can I not be skeptical when you've got one
representative here and a week to decide."
Wellemin also criticized the commission's proposed rate increases, saying
that it would hurt people who already conserve energy. As a resident with
low-energy appliances and no central air-conditioning, he said he would be
penalized because it would be difficult to reduce his power from one month to
the next.
Others warned the commission to take a methodical approach in deciding the
rate plan.
"If I have to act businesslike, I would expect state representatives to act
the same," said Don Osborn, a small business owner from the San Gabriel
Valley. "I haven't seen that."
---
Times staff writer Joe Mozingo contributed to this story.
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
=====================================
|
4,485 |
Subject: C4C CONNECTION: Last Volunteer Opportunity, New C4C Board, Ski
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1536.
=====================================
In this edition of the C4C Connection?
Come out and volunteer!
1. Upcoming Volunteer Opportunities with Special Olympics
2. Volunteer Hours Requirement
3. Volunteer Hours Update
Interested in running C4C next year?
Attend the C4C Board Meeting on Thursday, November 29th @ 12:30pm in C110
Event updates
4. Results from the Fun Run!
5. Ski Trip Planners Needed
6. Charity Auction Planners Needed
7. Winter Formal Planners Needed
8. Participate in the Worldwide Photo Scavenger Hunt over Winter Break
To find out more about all of these exciting C4C activities, read on for
more details....
_____________________________________________________________________
1. Volunteer for the Special Olympics? regular Monday Bowling event.
THIS IS THE LAST WEEK BEFORE THE SEMESTER ENDS!!!
Monday Bowling
Meet your 2-hour C4C Sports Weekend volunteer requirement in just one
afternoon - right here in Albany!
Monday, 11/19 3:30 - 5:00 pm
Albany Bowling Team Practice - help our local Special Olympians practice
for upcoming competitions!
To sign up, contact Mark Barrett ([email protected]) or just show
up at Albany Bowl on San Pablo!
Special Olympics Fall Classic - Special Thanks!
The Fall Classic was a great success! Thanks to the following volunteers
for giving their Sunday to help Special Olympics:
? Matt Hawe
? Chris Milks
? Nancy Iverson
? Shing Wong
? Sophia Bowers
? Mike Loden
? Ian Townsager
2. Everyone wishing to participate in C4C Sports Weekend must
volunteer for 2 hours with Special Olympics before Sports Weekend in April.
3. Quest for the Golden Briefcase? We have amassed 203.5 volunteer
hours, this equates to 0.424 hours per Haas student!
Interested in running C4C next year?
Attend the next C4C Board Meeting on Thursday, November 29th @ 12:30pm in C110
Make an impact within the Haas community and become a leader of one of the
largest organizations on campus. C4C not only plans most of the major
social functions on campus, it also provides students with many
opportunities to contribute to the community, via Special Olympics and
other charitable organizations.
We need leaders for the following board positions: Co-Chairs, Special
Olympics Chair, Community Chair, Sponsorship Chair, Sports Chair, Marketing
Chair and CFO.
If interested, please attend our next board meeting on Thursday, November
29th at 12:30 pm in C110. If you are unable to attend or need additional
information, please contact Wendy Hsu ([email protected]) or Linda Ng
([email protected]).
Fun Run Results
4. The annual Fun Run was a great success. Despite the rain, we had an
awesome turnout and we were able to raise even more money for Special
Olympics!!! Thank you all for your participation and generous donations.
The winning team was Los Galanos (Dennis Cox, Aaron McNally, Doug Buzbee
and Gerardo Fernando). Best costume award went to the ?Killer Bees? (Katy
Moore, Ali Eagleson, Kit Noren and Mike Gallagher).
Thanks to our terrific planning committee, led by Dave Sundin, for
organizing this event!!!
Ski Trip
5. TAHOE SKI TRIP PLANNING
GOT SNOW?? WANT TO KICK OFF NEXT SEMESTER RIGHT??
Organizing the ski trip is tons of fun, and it is a great way for everyone
to get together after winter break and party on the slopes! Contact Kara
Cosby ([email protected]) or Chris Milks ([email protected]) if
you are interested in helping to plan this event.
Charity Auction
6. The annual C4C Charity Auction is the event of the year! Where
else can you win dates with your classmates and dinner with your favorite
professors? Plus, it?s all in the name of charity! This event is always a
blast and is C4C?s biggest fundraiser of the year! If you are interested
in organizing the auction, contact Linda Ng ([email protected]).
Winter Formal
7. C4C is planning a new event, the Winter Formal in January. This
event will be a fun way to start the semester, and a great way to welcome
back your classmates. Volunteers are needed. Please contact, Wendy Hsu
([email protected]) if interested.
Worldwide Photo Scavenger Hunt
8. Remember the O-Week Scavenger Hunt? Now, imagine it on a GLOBAL
scale. Participate in C4C?s 1st Annual Worldwide Photo Scavenger Hunt over
winter break. Any location counts, even within the U.S.! Join all of
your classmates in search of the perfect Kodak moment. Start forming your
teams NOW! Further information and registration forms will be sent out
soon. Questions? Contact Jim Bobowski ([email protected]) or
Wendy Hsu ([email protected])
DON'T FORGET TO READ THE C4C CONNECTION EVERY WEEK!!!
___________________________________________________________
Linda J. Ng
MBA Candidate 2002
University of California Berkeley
Walter A. Haas School of Business
Home: (510) 524-3502
Email: [email protected]
____________________________________________________________
=====================================
|
4,486 |
Subject: energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1375.
=====================================
See the attached press release from the Department of Energy on the
changes to California's electricity market.
=09
=09
=09RELEASE DATE: November 01, 2000 ???? Print Friendly VersionPrint Friend=
ly=20
Version=20
=09
=09
=09Administration Helps Electricity Consumers by Proposing Reliability Stan=
dards=20
and Working to Lower Costs
=09
=09Clinton/Gore Administration Takes Action to Help Californians
=09
=09Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson today announced a series of initiati=
ves=20
that the Clinton/Gore Administration is taking to help California reduce t=
he=20
strain on their electricity system and protect consumers. Most=20
significantly, Richardson said the Administration will likely send a=20
proposed rule-making to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to=
=20
establish mandatory reliability standards for electricity =01) doing=20
administratively what Congress failed to accomplish this year. =20
=09
=09"California's electricity market has become dysfunctional -- and it's ti=
me to=20
make it right," said Secretary Richardson. "More than once, California wa=
s=20
close to having blackouts rolling throughout the state. In San Diego,=20
residents and businesses saw their electric bills double almost overnight.=
=20
Consumers need an electricity system that is reliable and they should not =
be=20
facing this kind of price volatility."=20
=09
=09Richardson made the announcement in Sacramento this morning with Califor=
nia=20
Gov. Gray Davis.=20
=09
=09Richardson said the Energy Department will take several initiatives to h=
elp=20
the reliability of California's electricity system and protect consumers=
=20
from dramatic price volatility, including: =20
=09
=09Establish mandatory reliability standards for electricity =01) The Energ=
y =20
Department will seek public comment on a proposed rulemaking that would=20
require utilities to follow mandatory rules to protect the reliability of=
=20
the electric grid in California and elsewhere. The Administration and othe=
rs=20
have been pressing Congress to enact these much-needed rules to protect=20
consumers. The purpose of this rulemaking is to break the impasse in=20
Congress and authorize establishing the standards necessary to make=20
electricity supplies more reliable and energy markets more efficient;
=09
=09Improve California's ability to import power =01) The Western Area Power=
=20
Administration, an Energy Department agency that co-owns a major substation=
=20
in Northern California, will provide $2 million to add a second transforme=
r=20
there. This will help California bring in much-needed power from the=20
Pacific Northwest;
=09
=09Provide millions to improve energy efficiency =01) The department is rel=
easing =20
a half million dollars in grants to the California Energy Commission to=20
support programs that will make California buildings, which account for=20
approximately 8 percent of all the energy used in buildings in the U.S.,=
=20
more energy efficient. In addition to the $3.7 million the Energy=20
Department has provided the state this year to help weatherize 3,081=20
lower-income California households, the department will provide $4.2 milli=
on=20
next year to weatherize homes and help lower the electricity bills of thos=
e=20
that can least afford high prices;
=09
=09Work to add renewable sources =01) The department is working with the st=
ate and=20
local governments to help develop the tremendous renewable resources in =20
California, such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass. To this end, =20
Richardson said the department's budget for next year contains $3 million=
=20
for wind projects and $5.6 million for geothermal projects in California;
=09
=09Reduce electricity consumption at key times =01) Participate, along with=
=20
representatives from other federal agencies with facilities in California,=
=20
in meetings in Sacramento today to develop a process for reducing=20
electricity consumption during heat waves; and
=09
=09Get federal power to California =01) Continue the work of the department=
's =20
Bonneville Power Administration and Western Area Power Administration with =
=20
California to get federal power to the state when it is needed the most. =
=20
Richardson announced that Bonneville's contract to provide low-cost power t=
o =20
Bay Area Rapid Transit will continue;
=09
=09Further cooperation with California =01) The Energy Department will also=
form a=20
partnership with the state of California to ensure that the department's =
=20
programs and resources are put to use to help the state with its electric =
=20
problems.
=09
=09Separately today FERC released a report that examines the causes of=20
California's electricity problems. FERC also issued a proposed order that=
=20
will help reduce wholesale electricity prices in California. Richardson=
=20
urged the Commission to move quickly to help protect California's citizens=
=20
and businesses.=20
=09
=09
=====================================
|
4,487 |
Subject: Article
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8863.
=====================================
Monday February 5 7:04 PM ET
Bush To Let Power Order Expire
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Standing by his word, President Bush (news - web sites)
will allow a federal order to expire Tuesday that required wholesale
electricity companies to sell to California's cash-strapped utilities, Bush's
spokesman said.
The agency that manages California's troubled power grid was surveying major
suppliers to see what power they will have available on the wholesale market
when the order ends, a spokeswoman for the agency said.
Asked about the emergency directive that the Bush administration extended
Jan. 23 for two weeks, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said Monday:
``It shall expire tomorrow.''
California lawmakers last week approved a $10 billion long-term plan to ease
the state's power crunch. The state will sell bonds to buy electricity giving
time for the state's two near-bankrupt private utilities to come up with
their own recovery plan.
But even as Gov. Gray Davis (news - web sites) and state lawmakers celebrated
the agreement, the state remained under a power emergency with electricity
supply margins so small during the weekend and into Monday that sporadic
blackouts were possible.
Officials at the California Independent System Operator (news - web sites),
the agency that manages the state's electricity market, were uncertain
whether they would have enough power after the federal directive expires
Tuesday.
``We're not sure what the impact will be. We're talking to suppliers to see
what their plans are,'' said Stephanie McCorkle, a spokeswoman for California
ISO.
In mid-December, the Clinton administration declared an energy emergency in
California and directed that suppliers continue to sell to the state's nearly
broke utilities - Southern California Edison (news - web sites) and Pacific
Gas & Electric - even though for some time they had been unable to pay for
their purchases, amassing debts that now have reached $12.8 billion.
On Jan. 23, Bush extended the order, but made clear through spokesmen and his
energy secretary, Spencer Abraham (news - web sites), that the power order
would not be prolonged further.
Fleischer noted Monday the directive has been sharply criticized by utilities
and officials in other Western states who worry about electricity shortages
of their own.
The order ``has implications for the region as a whole,'' said Fleischer.
Among those most critical of the federal directive have been utility and
government officials in the Northwest, where electricity prices have soared
because of the tight wholesale market caused by California's demands. In
Tacoma, Wash., the utility recently imposed a 50 percent rate hike for its
customers to try to pay for higher wholesale costs.
Major suppliers of power were not committing themselves one way or the other.
``I don't know what we will do,'' said Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for
Houston-based Reliant Energy, a major wholesale supplier with five generating
plants in California.
``We're encouraged by the recent progress in California,'' said Wheatley.
``But the credit worthiness of SoCal and PG&E and their ability to pay for
past power purchases remains very much in question.''
Pressed on whether Reliant would continued to sell to the utilities, Wheatley
said, ``We're going to continue to sell power to creditworthy buyers.''
Reliant filed a lawsuit last week, challenging a directive from the
California ISO that demanded power suppliers confirm that they planned to
continue selling electricity in the California market. Reliant argues in the
suit, which has yet to be heard, that the power agency lacks authority to
make such a demand.
Meanwhile, the chairman of a House Commerce subcommittee on energy became the
latest in a slew of Republican lawmakers who have chided California for not
building power plants and expecting low power rates.
``We want to work with California, but California has to work with the rest
of the country,'' said Rep. Joe Barton (news - bio - voting record), R-Texas,
during a speech at a conference of the American Public Power Association.
He said California officials have ``an obligation'' to review environmental
restrictions that inhibit power production, construction of new power plants
and transmission lines. Like Bush, Barton rejected federal controls on
wholesale prices, arguing that price regulation would lead to greater
shortages.
The APPA, which represents public power agencies around the country including
large ones in the Northwest and in California, passed a resolution calling
for the federal government to temporarily regulate wholesale prices until
California's power market problems are resolved.
-
On the Net: California Independent System Operator: http://www.caiso.com/
California page of American Public Power Association:
http://www.appanet.org/general/pressroom/california.htm
Energy Department: http://www.energy.gov
=====================================
|
4,488 |
Subject: RE: CEC Report on Natural Gas Supplies Adopted
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/655.
=====================================
ok so now that I read this email my last reply sounds just a bit air headed. As will this comment...didn't know our friend Racicot was doing that. Is he doing it on contract or was he named to some committee by W?
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 7:09 PM
To: Landwehr, Susan M.
Subject: FW: CEC Report on Natural Gas Supplies Adopted
Hey infrastructure team mate. I'm forwarding you some infrastructure stuff from the West. Heard Marc Racicot's going to be negotiating timber trade with Canada. That's something, huh?
Best,
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Schoen, Mary
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:58 AM
To: Parquet, David; Wehn, Samuel; Comnes, Alan; Swain, Steve; Brodbeck, Kelly
Cc: Keeler, Jeff; Dasovich, Jeff; Mara, Susan
Subject: CEC Report on Natural Gas Supplies Adopted
The CEC just approved a report drafted by staff that states there will be adequate natural gas supply this winter for electricity generation needs. It does qualify this statement by discussing where potential bottlenecks in delivery might occur and recommends actions to address the bottlenecks. See below for a link to the report.
Mary Schoen
Environmental Strategies
Enron Corp
415.782.7803 (phone)
415.782.7854 (fax)
For immediate release: October 3, 2001
Contact: Claudia Chandler : 916-654-4989
Energy Commission Report Projects
Improved Natural Gas Supplies For the State
Sacramento -While current natural gas prices in California have dropped to approximately half of 2000's average price, the specter remains of last December, when tight supplies caused prices to spike to 25 times their present rates. Now, as winter approaches, industry watchers wonder if the State has enough of the clean-burning fuel for the upcoming heating season, even as new gas-fired electricity generators come on line.
The Natural Gas Infrastructure Issues Report , adopted today by a 4-to-0 vote of the California Energy Commission, gives a qualified "yes" to the question of adequate supplies this winter. It identifies sufficient storage as a critical factor, and notes that utilities have substantially increased natural gas storage, largely because conservation and efficiency have dampened summer electricity demand.
Nearly 85 percent of the natural gas used by Californians comes by pipeline from gas fields located outside the State. Since California typically uses more natural gas in the winter than interstate pipelines can provide, additional supplies must be set aside in summer months to help balance supply and demand. For this reason, the report recommends that the Energy Commission continuously assess storage levels and monitor infrastructure improvements throughout the year.
The newly adopted report points out that California's natural gas supply system was designed years ago to provide enough gas for winter's peak heating demand. An increasing reliance on natural gas for generating electricity, however, has strained the system and revised old patterns of consumption.
"This report helps Californians understand what we have to do to assure that we have a reliable and reasonably priced electricity and natural gas system in the future," said Energy Commissioner Michal (spelling correct) Moore, Presiding Member of the Electricity and Natural Gas Committee that developed the document.
To help resolve possible supply problems, the document analyzes not only natural gas storage requirements but the interstate pipelines that bring the fuel from distant gas fields to the California border. These pipelines can deliver slightly more natural gas than intra-state gas pipelines ? those within our State's borders ? can receive. As a result, there are bottlenecks in getting some supplies to gas consumers that the report says must be improved.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) are improving and expanding their intra-state pipeline systems to help eliminate these constraints. According to the report, planned expansions of the interstate pipeline network should increase natural gas delivery to the State beginning next year, and additional improvements to the natural gas system should help prevent higher-than-normal prices that plagued California last winter.
Natural gas supplies in North America appear to be sufficient to meet demand in California and the rest of the United States for the next 50 years. The report recommends that the Energy Commission continue to monitor drilling rig activity and production levels for the long-term outlook. It also suggests that the Energy Commission, along with the Public Utilities Commission, should find ways to encourage and increase the in-state supply of natural gas.
The just adopted Natural Gas Infrastructure Issues Report can be found on the Energy Commission's Web Site at:
www.energy.ca.gov/contracts <http://www.energy.ca.gov/contracts>
Or report is attached:
<< File: Gas Infrastructure Report.pdf >>
=====================================
|
4,489 |
Subject: The Original Advantage #e12007
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/11702.
=====================================
[IMAGE]
July 24, 2001
Can't read this email? Click here
Issue#: e12007
PROVANTAGE Customer: [email protected]
To unsubscribe from the?
Original Advantage Click here
(Do Not Reply to this email)
Products that give you the Professional Advantage!
[IMAGE]
Acrobat v5.0 for Windows 95/98/NT4/Wme/W2K
By Adobe
What good is a document you can't open? Whether you create business plans,
spreadsheets, graphically rich brochures, or Web sites, Adobe Acrobat 5.0
software ...More
UPGRADE??$87.43
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
802.11B Wireless LAN Access Point 11Mbps
By D-Link Systems
Purchase a DWL-1000AP between July 9 - July 31, 2001 and take advantage of a
$20.00 mail-in rebate! ...More
??$191.38
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
MSDN Universal v6.0
By Microsoft
$200 In-Box Rebate in Full Package (MCSN003) for MSDN Library Subscribers &
MS Visual tools users, v5.0 or later: Visual Studio ...More
VERSION UPGRADE??$1822.92
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
New!
Phaser 3400 Personal Laser 100V 17ppm 1200dpi 16MB
By Xerox/Tektronix
Designed for versatility and speed, the Phaser 3400 bridges the gap between
personal and network printing.
??$610.58
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
New!
OmniPage Pro 11.0 ?
By ScanSoft
The fastest, easiest way to turn paper documents into digital files you can
edit.
OmniPage Pro 11's superior accuracy eliminates ...More
UPGRADE??$128.08
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
SpeedStream 5260 Ethernet ADSL External Modem
By Efficient Networks
The Efficient Networks consumer-installable DSL solution for any PC with an
Ethernet port
SpeedStream Ethernet DSL Modems provide ...More
??$194.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Crystal Reports v8.5 Developer Edition
By Crystal Decisions
Powerful Information Delivery for the Web
With Crystal Reports you can easily deliver rich, interactive content from
virtually ...More
??$391.60
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Back-UPS Pro 1000
By APC - UPS
Power problems wreak havoc on today's multitasking networked or stand-alone
PCs. The more you do with your PC, the more you stand to lose. An APC
Back-UPS ...More
??$327.85
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
E-Vanta 16MB AGP
By eVGA Video Cards
Features:
128-bit TnT2 Vanta (100MHz clock)
16MB 7ns 64-bit SDRAM Memory (125MHz clock, 1.0 GB/sec bandwidth)
300MHz RAMDAC Built-In ...More
??$36.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
CMP307XU 37in Plasma 1024x768 Black
By Hitachi CRT Monitors
Hitachi's most advanced plasma display yet, the Hi-Plasma CMP307XU is a
super-slim model featuring a big 37-inch screen with a 4:3 aspect ratio.
Fully ...More
??$8925.81
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
OmniView PS/2 All in One Cable Kit 10-Ft Pro
By Belkin
PS/2 Cable Kit - Part # A3X982 Includes:
One VGA Monitor extension cable with thumbscrews, HDDB15 Male/Female, 6'
(F2N025-06-T);
Two PS/2 Keyboard/mouse ...More
??$25.64
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
AIT-2 50/100GB 8mm Tape Cart 230 Meter w/MIC 1-Pk
By Sony
To meet the capacity and performance demands of AIT tape drives, Sony has
developed a line of AIT media with features designed to provide a high level
...More
??$79.34
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
340 Series 11Mbps Workgroup Bridge; 128-Bit WEP; R
By Cisco Systems
Designed to connect two or more networks (typically located in different
buildings), Cisco Aironet wireless bridges deliver high data rates and
superior ...More
??$459.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
EtherFast Wireless AP + Cable/DSL Router w/4-Port
By Linksys
The EtherFast Wireless AP + Cable/DSL Router provides the ideal solution for
connecting your wireless network to a high-speed broadband Internet
connection ...More
??$228.95
[IMAGE]
?
?
Web Address: www.PROVANTAGE.com?
?Toll Free: 800-336-1166???? Fax: 330-494-5260???? email:
[email protected]
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | FREE Catalog
,2001 PROVANTAGE Corporation, 7249 Whipple Ave. NW, North Canton, OH 44720
Products, prices, terms, conditions, or offers may change at any time.
Company and/or product names are generally trademarks, or registered
trademarks of their respective companies. Some promotional text may be
copyrighted by the product's manufacturer.?
The Original Advantage promotional email is delivered only to customers of
PROVANTAGE Corporation. PROVANTAGE customers have purchased products in the
past and submitted their email address as part of the checkout process. Or,
customers have entered their name in the "Add to Email List" box on the
PROVANTAGE.com home page. Any customer may unsubscribe from the list at any
time by going to http://www.provantage.com/unsubscribe.htm. The email address
is permanently removed from additional promotional electronic mailings, and
will not be reactivated unless requested by the customer.??
[IMAGE]
BizRate Customer Certified (GOLD) Site
=====================================
|
4,490 |
Subject: California Update - 7.23.01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/12116.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 07/23/2001 07:47 PM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
07/23/2001 07:46 PM
To: David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy
Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Tim
Belden/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Richter/ENRON@enronXgate, Stephen
Swain/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Susan
J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M Landwehr/Enron@EnronXGate, Harry
Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate, Kristin
Walsh/Enron@EnronXGate
cc:
Subject: California Update - 7.23.01
Quick update to Jim's note:
Still appears that the Assembly only has enough left in it tonite to deal
with the budget and then recess; and it is still unclear if they'll get
enough Republicans to go along tonite, or be forced to come back tomorrow to
try again.
If the Legislature does get the budget done and recesses without addressing
the energy issues, then decision-making on some key issues---Direct Access in
particular---will fall back in the PUC's lap. (The Legislature is scheduled
to be out until August 20th.)
The PUC has scheduled a vote on whether to suspend DA, the rate agreement
with DWR, DWR's rev. req. and other issues on August 23rd.
PUC President Loretta Lynch has said that she wants to issue a proposed
decision on these issues sometime between now and the first week of August.
As Jim points out, we continue to try to hammer out favorable outcomes for
Direct Access and cost allocation in both forums----the Legislature and the
PUC.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 07/23/2001 07:31 PM -----
James D Steffes/ENRON@enronXgate
07/23/2001 02:15 PM
To: David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy
Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Tim
Belden/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Richter/ENRON@enronXgate, Stephen
Swain/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: California Update - 7.23.01
The attached note is from Enron's hired lobbyist in Sacramento. Looks like
the only thing that is going to happen will be a Budget without anything on
energy restructuring (could continue to change).
There will be some additional negotiating on SBX2 78 over the recess. Enron
is looking for a way into those discussions (Jeff Dasovich). We will try to
push good language on DA dates and assignment of Utility and CDWR costs.
On another note, CDWR has announced its revenue requirements going forward.
The numbers are significantly less than had previously been expected (due to
lower costs for spot market purchases). The end result, if their figures are
correct, is that the March 27 3c/kwh increase would be sufficient going
forward (we are trying to validate). The key is that now the Retained
Generation proceedings will determine if any more $ is needed from retail
customers.
Thanks,
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: "Scott Govenar" <[email protected]>@ENRON
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Scott+20Govenar+22+20+3Csgovenar+40govadv+2Ecom+3E+40ENR
[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 1:55 PM
To: Sharma, Ban; Leboe, David; Eric Letke; Thome, Jennifer; Ken Smith; Bev
Hansen; Hedy Govenar; Buster, Miyung; Guerrero, Janel; Robert Frank; Mike
Day; Lawner, Leslie; Kingerski, Harry; Karen Denne; Kean, Steven J.; Alan
Comnes; Susan J Mara; Kaufman, Paul; Jeff Dasovich; Steffes, James D.; Rick
Shapiro
Subject: MOU UPDATE
For those of you who don't already know, the Senate passed its version of
the SCE MOU, SBX2 78 (Polanco/Sher) which requires users over 500 kw to foot
the bill for SCE's entire undercollection and it eliminates DA completely.
This largely represents TURN's proposal. The Senate also passed a budget
and has since adjourned until August 20.
The Assembly had been considering two MOUs, ABX 82 (Keeley) and ABX 50
(Wright). Both bills had difficulty attracting a majority of votes given
their different approaches to dealing with SCE. ABX 82 for example, had
large users picking up most of the tab for SCE's undercollection whereas ABX
50 split those charges among all users. Both bills provided for some type
of direct access and ABX 82 also provided for a purchase of the transmission
system. In light of the difficulty in passing either bill, it appears as if
the Assembly will shelve both proposals today in order to amend SBX 78 over
the summer break. An internal legislative working group may be formed to
draft amendments but this has not been confirmed. Large users have begun
drafting extensive amendments recognizing that in its current form SBX 78
has very little to offer.
The Assembly will try to pass the final portion of the budget today and
recess until August 20.
=====================================
|
4,491 |
Subject: FW: Sacramento Bee: (10/20/2001) Davis hopes to rework power deals
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/833.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Beiser, Megan [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:29 AM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: Sacramento Bee: (10/20/2001) Davis hopes to rework power deals
Here's an article, with a negative angle on direct access and the long term
contracts, that appeared in Saturday's Sacramento Bee. In the article,
Treasurer Angelides criticizes the PUC for delaying the decision on direct
access, while Loretta Lynch defends the action and notes that Angelides'
requested the delay.
Davis hopes to rework power deals: The long-term energy pacts are having a
big impact on the state's budget.
By Jim Sanders
Bee Capitol Bureau
(Published Oct. 20, 2001)
With California holding billions in long-term energy contracts at
higher-than-market prices, Gov. Gray Davis' advisers said Friday that he
will try to renegotiate some of the pacts.
But some large businesses aren't waiting -- they're cutting their own deals
with electricity suppliers and leaving homeowners and small businesses
holding the bag, state records show.
"This stampede could shift over $8 billion in costs to these consumers in
coming years," said state Treasurer Phil Angelides.
The developments reflect a new dilemma: The state's strategy of negotiating
long-term contracts helped end the electricity crisis but sparked a new set
of financial problems that could affect the state for the next decade.
What began in January as the temporary purchase of emergency power for
debt-ridden Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San
Diego Gas & Electric Co. has shaken the state's budget and clouded future
spending.
The signing of long-term contracts was vital and effective at a time when
electricity costs were spiraling out of control, but falling prices have
prompted a re-examination of some of them, Davis' advisers said Friday.
The focus on long-term contracts overshadowed the disclosure that the state
expects its total electricity costs for the three utilities to be $17.2
billion by December 2002 -- less than the $21.4 billion originally estimated
and further evidence that the crisis has abated.
Barry Goode, Davis' legal affairs secretary, declined to discuss how many of
the long-term contracts the governor wants to renegotiate.
"Certainly we're not targeting every contract," he said. "Long-term
contracts have been extremely valuable in keeping the market stable. ... I
don't think you should expect some kind of wholesale effort on all these
contracts."
Davis has signed more than 50 long-term contracts, with about two dozen
generators, for roughly $43 billion in electricity. Power purchased under
the pacts will average $69 per megawatt-hour over the next 10 years -- more
than double the current market rate.
Goode and other Davis spokesmen declined to comment Friday on which
companies will be asked to resume negotiations, whether they already have
been approached, and what arguments will be used.
"I'd rather not show my cards at this point," Goode said.
Steve Stengel, a spokesman for Dynegy Inc., was noncommittal.
"We have a legally binding agreement with the state, so therefore we don't
feel an obligation to renegotiate, he said. "But we would be willing to
consider renegotiation if it was mutually beneficial."
Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of
generators and traders, said the state would have to "give up something in
exchange" for any reworking of the deals.
Possibilities include dropping lawsuits against generators or settling
disputes over previous electricity purchases, he said.
Whether Davis ultimately is successful in reducing the burden, the state's
plan is to issue $12.5 billion in bonds to repay itself for current and
future purchases. That plan relies on repayment from utility customers,
including businesses.
But in the past three months, some big electricity users have removed
themselves as ratepayers in the three investor-owned utility districts and
cut their own deals with generators for electricity, state records show.
With every departure, utilities have fewer customers to repay the $12.5
billion bonds, increasing the financial burden on homeowners and small
businesses.
"It isn't fair and it isn't right," Angelides said.
He blamed the state Public Utilities Commission for not preventing such
departures sooner. Originally scheduled to act in June, the PUC delayed a
vote until September.
Angelides wrote PUC President Loretta Lynch on Friday asking that the
agency's decision be made retroactive to July 1.
Lynch labeled the request "amazing" and said the PUC delayed its decision in
June at the behest of Angelides and other state officials.
She declined to comment on whether she would support a modification, saying
she wants to hear arguments from all sides.
Lynch said the problem of shifting bond costs onto consumers could be eased
by renegotiating the state's long-term contracts.
The Bee's Jim Sanders can be reached at (916) 326-5538 or
[email protected]
=====================================
|
4,492 |
Subject: Re: FERC Meeting This Morning - Order on El Paso Capacity
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2680.
=====================================
Actually ordering El Paso to do what TW already does, so if anything, affirms
TW's operating procedures. El Paso has been in the cross-hairs of the entire
industry. Interestingly, this suit arose from the lengthy and detailed
discussions we all had as part of the settlement---as you can imagine, El
Paso saw it as a negative outcome of those talks. We can discuss further
when I'm in Houston tomorrow and Friday.
Best,
Jeff
James D Steffes
10/25/2000 09:40 AM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: FERC Meeting This Morning - Order on El Paso Capacity Allocation
Jeff --
Does this have any implication for the TW capacity issue?
Jim
----- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 10/25/2000 09:40 AM -----
Shelley Corman
10/25/2000 09:28 AM
To: Tim Aron/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Bagot/OTS/Enron@ENRON, John
Ballentine/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Theresa Branney/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Martha
Benner/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Eric Benson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Donna
Bily/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jack
Boatman/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bob
Chandler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bill Cordes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Christi Culwell/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mary
Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari
Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Dushinske/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sharon
Farrell/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John
Goodpasture/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Glen
Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Robert Hayes/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Rod
Hayslett/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Bambi Heckerman/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Theresa
Hess/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Robert Hill/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Staci
Holtzman/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Tamara Hopkins/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stanley
Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Steve Hotte/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lee
Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Martha Janousek/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven
January/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Beth Jensen/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Anne
Jolibois/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey
Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robert Kilmer/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Frazier
King/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tim
Kissner/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Laura Lantefield/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda L
Lawrence/NA/Enron@Enron, Blair Lichtenwalter/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth
Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Teb Lokey/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Phil
Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Donna
Martens/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy McCoppin/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mike
McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rockford Meyer/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay
Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael Moran/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sheila
Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michel Nelson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ray
Neppl/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Robert
Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Christi L
Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle
Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Zelda Paschal/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Geneva
Patterson/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Eileen
Peebles/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Keith Petersen/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Peggy
Phillips/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Janet Place/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Tony
Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Colleen Raker/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kathy
Ringblom/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James
Saunders/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Dave Schafer/NA/Enron@ENRON, Donna
Scott/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike G Smith/NA/Enron@Enron, Louis
Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lon Stanton/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, James Studebaker/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Jim
Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Gina Taylor/OTS/Enron@Enron, Debbie
Thompson/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Denis Tu/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Michael Van
Norden/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Veatch/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Donald
Vignaroli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jody Warner/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly
Watson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Julia White/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kim
Wilkie/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jane Wilson, Michele Winckowski/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: FERC Meeting This Morning - Order on El Paso Capacity Allocation
Chairman Hoecker announced that FERC will hold a special meeting Nov. 1 to
issue a proposed order detailing possible remedies to the California
wholesale market based on two investigations currently underway.
Only one item was discussed - an order resolving the Amoco complaint over El
Paso's capacity allocation. In the order, the Commission finds that El
Paso's allocation of delivery point capacity at Topock is unjust &
unreasonable. The Commission directs El Paso to assign primary point rights
to its shippers using a one-time assignment process outlined in the order.
If elections for primary point capacity exceed available space, El Paso will
pro rate the space and allow shippers to select other primary points in an
iterative fashion until all shippers have primary point rights equal to their
firm capacity rights. Chairman Hoecker said this case illustrates the fact
that overbooking pipeline capacity is even more problematic that the
overbooking of airline capacity.
=====================================
|
4,493 |
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/2763.
=====================================
Thanks. Good points. Will make sure that we have "bad guys" issued
covered. You have a great holiday with your family and a safe and happy New
Year.
Best,
Jeff
James D Steffes
12/27/2000 09:29 AM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
27th/28th
Jeff --
Your notes look great. Best of luck today with the Hearings. Only items not
included would be (1) information from the PX / ISO and (2) governance at the
PX / ISO. I don't think these will are appropriate at these hearings.
Finally, I think that if the Hearings begin to devolve into a "who are the
bad guys", what are you proposing Mike Day respond? Do we have any messages
for this situation (however unlikely)?
Jim
----- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 12/27/2000 09:26 AM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/26/2000 07:05 PM
To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Eric
Letke/DUB/EES@EES, George McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer
Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
McGowan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, [email protected], Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Stuart Staley/LON/ECT@ECT, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
27th/28th
You're right, Sue. Rates can't go up w/out declaring the rate freeze over in
some fashion---trying to finesse it. Thanks very much for the comments.
Harry also had a good comment---don't specify the amount of rate increase in
our comments; rather note that the rate increase needs to be well-reasoned
and based on facts and evidence. Will make that change.
Susan J Mara
12/26/2000 06:43 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Eric
Letke/DUB/EES@EES, George McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kevin McGowan/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lisa
Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT,
[email protected], Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Stuart Staley/LON/ECT@ECT, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the
27th/28th
Jeff,
This looks good. It comes across as moderate in tone-- although probably no
one else will ask to leave the rate freeze in place.
I have a legal question -- Under AB 1890, I don't see anyway that the CPUC
can raise rates without ending the rate freeze first. Am I missing
something? So, how is it clear that the CCPUC can raise the rates on Feb 1?
It's clear,however, that once the retained assets are valued that the rates
can be changed.
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
12/26/2000 01:15 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Dennis
Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, George McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer
Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
McGowan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT,
Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], Stuart Staley/LON/ECT@ECT, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES,
[email protected], Robert C Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mike D
Smith/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: DRAFT talking points for California PUC Hearings on the 27th/28th
Attached is a draft of the talking points for the Commission's hearings. Few
points:
Our time is likely to be limited to 5-10 minutes.
Mike Day, our outside counsel, will make the presentation on our behalf.
Mike Day is fleshing out the legal details of our presentation and he will
forward that along for folks review later today.
Comments can be forwarded to me via email, pager (888.916.7184), voicemail
(415.782.7822), or home (415.621.8317).
We will finalize the message points on tomorrow's daily call (10 AM CST).
The call in number is 800.713.8600. Code is 80435.
The Commission's hearings begin tomorrow at 10 AM (PST).
=====================================
|
4,494 |
Subject: valuation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/464.
=====================================
The following are summaries of legislation that we worked on this year:
AB995/SB1194
In their original form these bills would have:
Codified existing utility responsibilties for the distribution grid without
ensuring ecquivalent protection for customers' existing rights to
interconnect their own facilities to the distribution grid and to invest in
cost effective facilities that they allowed to build and use today
Limited the CPUC's pending rulemaking on dg and dc before there was adequate
discussion of the important and controversial policy issues
Borrowed language from 1890, reciting only the language which supports
utility control of the dg while omitting the portions that state customers
and competitors should have open and comparable access to the dg
provided no mechanism to ensure increased reliability for electric consumers
Included an inaccurate "laundry list" description of all the things that
utilities and ESP's shall continue to be responsible for
All of the above was iriginally drafted in language expanding the utilities'
rights and franchise authority, and provided greater certainty of cost
recovery in situations where the utilities have traditionally borne
significant risk
As amended, the bill only codified the CPUC's existing jurisdction and the
utilities' existing tole as to facilities owned by the utilities, and
included numerous restrictive clauses to prevent expansive interpretation of
the statute in favor of the utilities
AB2290
This bill would have done the following:
capped electric rates in San Diego at the same level required under 1890
which would have created as much as $1 billion in undercollection
provided that the same customers who recive the benefits of the rate cap
today may not necessarily have to pay back the undercollection, thereby
promoting cost shifting.
limited the CPUC to implementings steps which allow the utility to fix the
wholesale markets problem without prividing similar opportunites to non
utilities
required the CPUC to petition FERC to find that wholesale rates from this
summer were not just and reasonable and to seek means to force power
marketers and generators to disgorge excessive profits
AB265
This bill which became the final vehicle contained a simplified version of
AB2290, but patterned on the Wood decision
Enron helped dissuade the authors from accepting the following amendmants
provided that the rate cap would ahve applied to all customers of all three
utilities
Provided that all classes of customers be included in the bill
provided that it would be a freeze and not a rate cap
we advocated for a reduced term to the cap and it was reduced to two years,
as opposed to the original proposal for 3-4 years
AB970
Enron helped make the following amendments to the bill
Labor and environmental interests sought to include stricter definitions
related to air quality under the federal act and to limit the operations of
peaking plants to stage II alert situations. These were deleted from the bill
Labor sought to include rate regulations of the output of expedited peaking
plants. This provision did not make it into the bill
Renewable providers sought a cleanest first processing priority of all CEC
applications..this was deleted
The Electricity Oversight Boars was irignally designated as the entity with
whom peaking plants had to contract with. This was amended to give the EOB
only consultive authority to contact the ISO regarding peaking agreements and
with the CPUC regarding interconnection issues
A limit of 500 hours of operation per year was deleted from the bill
Language drafted by Enron was inserted to clarify that local gov had to
sibmit final comments/determinations within 100 days of filing an expidited
peaking application
Language clarifing that an expedited peaking platn could be taken out of
service in lieu of converting to a combined cycle plant after three years was
taken at our request
language regarding the recovery of transmission upgrade or expansion project
costs was clairified to ensure that no transmission related costs were
included in utility distrbution rates
We kept the bill to be voluntary, in lieu of existing processes
SCE/PGE proposal
Lobbied against their legislative proposal which would have extended the rate
freeze and continued CTC collection indefinitely. The proposal would have
also provided a mechanism to recoup increased wholesale costs for electricity
which exceeded the frozen rate charged to customoers. We were successful in
keeping them from finding an author
SB1622
Helped defeat a bill that would have authorized the CEC to develop
regulations, retroactively, relating to power plant siting and environmental
justice
SB1345
Enron sought and obtained deletion of provisions which would have restricted
dg plants from obtaining improved interconnection or standby service unless
they were prohibited from selling power off-site. The bill merely limited
the funding of state grants to DG projects which do not sell off site.
=====================================
|
4,495 |
Subject: California Update 9-14-2001
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/183.
=====================================
For questions or comments regarding this report please contact G. Britt Whitman at ex:5-4014 or Kristin Walsh at ex:3-9510.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
? Senate May Seal SoCal's Fate
? SoCal Edison Eyeing Bankruptcy
California Senate & SoCal's Fate
With the California Assembly's passage of SB 78XX last week, Senator John Burton (President Pro Tem) is positioned as perhaps the most legislatively powerful man in California. Maintaining his hard line against the Assembly's amendments to SB78XX, Burton has completely rejected SB78 XX and has instead revived a previously introduced Assembly bill (AB 67XX), which had not faced a Senate floor vote. The majority of AB 67XX's original language has been gutted by Burton and discretely replaced with the following points:
? Financing of the dedicated rate component has been modified to incorporate a smaller rate base consisting of consumers using only 70 kv or more (formerly users as low as 20 kv were included). The 70 kv value is rumored closer to 120 kv.
? The state will have a 5-year option to purchase SoCal's transmission assets at twice book value and SoCal will be allowed to transfer profits from the sale to their parent company.
? A renewables portfolio equal to 20% of total generation must be in place by 2010.
? There is an 11.6% return on generation in the bill.
? The amount authorized for SoCal's bond issuance has been lowered from $2.9B to $2.5B.
? Direct access language has been included in the bailout bill. The exact language, which was developed by Senator Bowen's office, is not yet known, however, earlier versions suggest that all parties will be forced to pay exit fees, switch providers no earlier than 2003, and there will be no cost shifting away from the DWR. (Note: Senator Burton is reportedly listening carefully to Treasurer Angelides' arguments about the revenue bonds not selling if direct access is included.)
It is doubtful that Burton will insist on the loyalty of fellow Democrats and will preferably discourage the bill's support. The arrival of AB67 XX on the Senate floor may be little more than Burton's civil compliance with Gov. Davis' request. All Republicans and at least 5 Democrats are expected to vote against the bill; an additional two dissenting Democrat votes would effectively block AB67 XX. Consumer advocates that adamantly oppose this bill (because it lacks the state's ownership of hard transmission assets and burdens residential consumers with excessive rates) are "optimistic" about the bill's defeat in the Senate. Despite these circumstances, it is highly conceivable that the Senate could pass along a virtually ineffective & inadequate bailout package for the Assembly's approval.
Burton is reportedly avoiding discourse with Davis over AB67 XX and as the hours pass ever closer to the midnight deadline, Burton will likely introduce the bill for floor vote and then hurriedly adjourn the Senate. If the bill passes, the Assembly will bare the difficult task of either accepting the bill as is, or reject the bill and risk SoCal's bankruptcy. We believe that if the bill makes it into the Assembly, AB67 XX will pass despite strong opposition from both the CTMA and consumer advocates. There is no current vote count available in the Assembly, but we expect the Assembly to debate the bill into the early hours of Saturday morning.
Inside Edison
There are still strong indications that even if a bailout plan is passed, SoCal will voluntarily file for bankruptcy or a creditor, most likely a generator, will take them into bankruptcy. SoCal remains concerned due to the number of contingent claims on their cash (by the DWR, etc.) and appear likely to try to protect these cash flows. From the generators' perspective, if a plan is passed, the bank creditors will get paid but they will not. Also, the DWR and ISO have not resolved even what amount is owed to generators for power they have provided this year, let alone when they will be paid. The total amount owed through the ISO is approximately $2B. Nonetheless, the generators remain under a federal order to provide power to the state. Once a deal is passed leaving too little money for SoCal to pay the generators, this will leave them with little means of satisfaction other than filing against SoCal.
SoCal has privately indicated to Senators that if the AB 67XX fails to include any consumer using 100 kv or more as the base for the dedicated rate component, SoCal will be forced to file for bankruptcy because of their inability to effectively securitize the bailout bonds. SoCal feels that this rate base is too small and the risk of these businesses fleeing the state is too high. The CTMA also has indicated that some of its members may leave the state to avoid having to pay the extra surcharge on power.
SoCal has not communicated a position on whether the $400 million trim (from the original $2.9B) puts them into bankruptcy. We estimate that an additional $400 million hit is indeed too much to bear and would prompt a voluntary bankruptcy petition.
=====================================
|
4,496 |
Subject: RE: Consumer Groups, Calif PUC Question Pwr Contract Validity
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/396.
=====================================
Horrible, unfortunately. He was the loudest, most articulate voice appearing before the PUC on the 20th, staunchly--and I mean staunchly--opposing DA. If I see him, I'm going to get all over him. But me thinks the contracts are in for a wild ride.
-----Original Message-----
From: Comnes, Alan
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 4:01 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: Consumer Groups, Calif PUC Question Pwr Contract Validity
Good to see Bill Ahern back in the mix ...
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 1:44 PM
To: Shapiro, Richard; Comnes, Alan; Steffes, James D.; Kean, Steven J.; Mara, Susan; Kaufman, Paul; Denne, Karen; Palmer, Mark A. (PR)
Subject: Consumer Groups, Calif PUC Question Pwr Contract Validity
Importance: High
Consumer Groups, Calif PUC Question Pwr Contract Validity
LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--Two California consumer groups have asked California Attorney General Bill Lockyer to investigate whether some state electricity contracts should be nullified because of a possible conflict of interest held by one of the state's negotiations, according to a press release Monday.
The Utility Reform Network and Consumers Union asked Lockyer to examine whether income earned from energy companies by consultant Vikram Budhraja presented a conflict of interest, because he may have been involved in contract negotiations with those companies
We believe there is ample evidence for the Attorney General to investigate whether some of the state's electricity contracts were made in violation of California's conflict of interest laws," said Bill Ahern, senior policy analyst with Consumers Union West Coast Regional Office. "If the Attorney General finds that a contract was made in violation of the law, it must be set aside as void."
Three weeks after Budhraja's January hire date, Williams Companies (WMB <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=WMB>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=WMB>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=WMB>) won a $3.4 billion contract to provide power to the state over 10 1/2 years. Budhraja disclosed in mid-August that his company, the Electric Power Group, was paid more than $10,000 by Williams during the previous 12 months. Budhraja was hired by the California Department of Water Resources to negotiate power contracts, but hasn't said which generators he dealt with in the weeks before the Williams contract was signed.
"It is reasonable to assume that Budhraja may have been involved in the negotiations that led to the Williams contract," Ahern said. "It is also likely that there are more detailed records and evidence in existence, which only a subpoena or search warrant may uncover."
The groups also are concerned that Budhraja may have held a conflict of interest due to his potential involvement in negotiating a $3.9 billion contract with Allegheny Energy Inc. (AYE <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=AYE>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=AYE>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=AYE>) while he owned stocks in energy companies, according to the release.
The Attorney General's office recently said it doesn't plan to investigate conflicts of interest involving energy contract negotiations. No one at the office could be reached for comment Monday.
The California Public Utilities Commission is also petitioning federal regulators to throw out some of the state's $43 billion in long-term energy contracts, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Monday.
The CPUC has argued in filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission over the past three months that energy companies took advantage of the state's energy crisis to negotiate high-priced contracts, according to the report. The average price of power under the contracts is $69 a megawatt-hour, more than double peak electricity prices last week.
CPUC lawyers have filed challenges before the FERC on deals negotiated with Scottish Power (SPI <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=SPI>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=SPI>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=SPI>) unit PacifiCorp, Alliance Colton LLC, Sempra Energy (SRE <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=SRE>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=SRE>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=SRE>) and Calpine Corp. (CPN <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/quotes/?symbol=CPN>, news <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/news/?symbol=CPN>, msgs <http://quicken.excite.com/investments/discuss/?symbol=CPN>), according to the report.
Budhraja disclosed in August that he owned as much as $10,000 in Scottish Power stock while a $1 billion long-term contract with subsidiary PacifiCorp was being hammered out. The state signed the 10-year contract July 6. Budraha sold his stock July 30. State officials say Budhraja had nothing to do with the deal, according to the report.
=====================================
|
4,497 |
Subject: PROVANTAGE - The Original Advantage #e010202
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5405.
=====================================
[IMAGE]
February 7, 2001
Can't read this email? Click here
Issue#: e010202
Customer email: [email protected]
To unsubscribe from the?
Original Advantage Click here
(Do Not Reply to this email)
Welcome to the Original Advantage!
Welcome to the premier issue of the Original Advantage by PROVANTAGE.com!
Once per week we will offer our customers the hottest deals and latest
products in computing today! Stay tuned to your Inbox for our latest issue!
?
Products that give you the Professional Advantage!
[IMAGE]
New Version!
Microsoft BackOffice Server 2000 (CD & DVD)
By Microsoft
Includes CD & DVD.
Academic Edition (AE) Also Available
UPGRADE??$1738.64
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Wireless LAN PCMCIA Card 11Mbps
By D-Link
The DWL-650 is a high-speed 11 Megabits per second (Mbps) Ethernet wireless
network adapter that plugs into your Notebook PC's PCMCIA slot. Once ...More
??$123.92
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Consumable Products
Do you need toner, inkjet cartridges or photo paper? PROVANTAGE carries a
complete line of consumables to keep you stocked. Click on the link above to
view our complete listing!
[IMAGE]
Increase Your Memory!
SIMMS, DIMMS and the like - we've got them all!
[IMAGE]
Cables Galore!
Check out our huge selection of cables! Whatever your cable needs may be, we
have the right selection for you - at the best price!
[IMAGE]
MCSE Training Kit: Windows 2000 Core Requirements
By Microsoft Press
Build the skills tested by these exams: 70-210 - Installing, Configuring &
Administering Windows 2000 Pro; 70-215 - Installing, Configuring &
Administering ...More
??$105.74
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Microsoft Open Licenses
by Microsoft
Receive additional discounts on your Microsoft software. Get real
flexibility, a wide selection of products -- and no contracts to sign!
[IMAGE]
GS790 19in/18v 26mm 1600x1200 76Hz TCO99
By ViewSonic
ViewSonic Graphics Series monitors incorporate features normally found in
much more expensive models. They are designed for the mainstream market,
where ...More
??$339.98
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Oxygen GVX1 AGP 32MB Display Accelerator
By 3Dlabs
Oxygen GVX1 is the only sub-$1000 board to deliver complete OpenGL geometry
and lighting acceleration in hardware. Hardware geometry boosts the
interactivity ...More
??$442.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
110L-LTOK 1TB/2TB Autoloader LTO LVD External
By Exabyte
The high-capacity Exabyte 110L Ultrium LTO autoloader occupies very little
space in the rack, on the desktop or on top of a server. Occupying just 1
cubic foot and 5 units of rack height, the 110L provides a compact,
affordable alternative to standalone tape drives.?
??$7611.71
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
FinePix 2400 Digital Camera 2.1MP CCD 8MB
By Fuji
The FinePix 2400 Zoom offers a high quality 2.1 megapixel CCD, 3x optical
zooming, continuous shooting, intelligent Auto White Balance and more to
ensure ...More
??$338.33
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
LaserJet 1100 xi Printer
By Hewlett Packard
The HP LaserJet 1100 Series printers deliver a stunning 8ppm print speed, 125
sheet input tray, 2Mb of RAM expandable to 18Mb, and copying and scanning ...
More
??$406.98
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
3Com Courier 56K Corporate Modem External
By 3Com
As a growing business, you need to work quickly and efficiently.
Communications glitches frustrate you. Poor performance hampers you. Single
purpose devices ...More
??$242.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
CanoScan D660U Flatbed Scanner 600x1200dpi USB
By Canon Scanners
Lift the cover, insert your slide or negative and press the external film
scan button. The D660U scanner, with its built-in backlight, produces
spectacular ...More
??$127.96
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
MP3 Player - Plays MP3 CDs/Audio CDs/VDC
By D-Link
The D-Link DMP-CD100 is a MP3 based CD player that plays both CD's with MP3
files and audio CD's. It's cutting edge technology provides over 10 hours of
non-stop music in a single unit.
??$120.95
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
KVM Switch Cable Kit PS/2 6-Foot
By Linksys
The Linksys ProConnect CPU Switch Cables allow you to effortlessly connect a
computer's monitor, keyboard, and mouse to the Linksys ProConnect CPU Switch.
...More
??$21.48
[IMAGE]
?
?
Web Address: www.PROVANTAGE.com?
?Toll Free: 800-336-1166???? Fax: 330-494-5260???? email:
[email protected]
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | FREE Catalog
,2001 PROVANTAGE Corporation, 7249 Whipple Ave. NW, North Canton, OH 44720
Products, prices, terms, conditions, or offers may change at any time.
Company and/or product names are generally trademarks, or registered
trademarks of their respective companies. Some promotional text may be
copyrighted by the product's manufacturer.?
?
BizRate Customer Certified (GOLD) Site
=====================================
|
4,498 |
Subject: Feds Hint at Power Bill Refunds Firms ordered to justify high rates
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/9827.
=====================================
Feds Hint at Power Bill Refunds
Firms ordered to justify high rates
David Lazarus and Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Staff Writers
Saturday, March 10, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/10/M
N144141.DTL
Federal regulators warned power companies yesterday that they may have to
refund $69 million to California ratepayers for charging unreasonable prices
during recent electricity shortages.
However, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission left the door wide open for
the unnamed 13 generators to avoid refund payments if they could offer
"further justification" for why their rates should be considered fair.
Consumer activists were quick to note that the commission's order was
significant.
"They have acknowledged for the first time that there has been abuse of the
marketplace," said Doug Heller, assistant organizing director for the
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. "It's an
acknowledgment that the power companies have been ripping us off."
However, consumer groups also pointed out that the order -- issued late in
the day -- was partly a political ploy intended to make the Bush
administration look more sympathetic to California's plight.
The proposed $69 million refund also represents only a fraction of the
billions of dollars that utilities have had to pay due to rising electricity
rates.
The commission set narrow parameters for power charges in January that may be
considered unreasonable. It is only considering charges above $273 per
megawatt hour during the series of Stage 3 energy emergencies that threatened
statewide blackouts.
William Massey, the lone commissioner who voted against the order, noted that
of 70,300 power transactions in January above $150 per megawatt hour, only
about 13,000 fall within the regulatory commission's parameters for potential
refunds.
"This order is arbitrary, capricious and unlawful," he said. "Eighty percent
of the transactions have been excluded from refunds."
But commission Chairman Curt Hebert characterized the order as an aggressive
effort to safeguard California consumers.
"Today's refund order demonstrates the commission's commitment to ensure
appropriate and reasonable prices in the wholesale electricity market given
the supply and demand imbalance in California," he said in a statement.
POWER COMPANIES NOT WORRIED
Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an
energy-industry association in Menlo Park, said power companies are not
worried about the prospect of having to pay out millions of dollars in
refunds.
"The people I've talked to said they can justify the costs for a majority of
hours where FERC said there may have been overcharges," he said.
"We will be supplying supporting data to FERC," said Richard Wheatley, a
spokesman for Reliant Energy in Houston. "We commend them for doing this
review. We believe this can be resolved and we can all move on."
Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers, a trade
group representing out-of-state generators, said the commission's order shows
that the system is working.
"In my opinion, what has been identified is talking about potential refunds,
" he said. "The generators will have a chance to justify their rates. I'm not
terribly troubled by that."
The California Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power
grid, welcomed the order, although it said $69 million is lower than its own
estimates of potential overcharges.
The ISO had asked the commission earlier this month to review $350 million in
January power charges that exceeded the regulatory commission's "soft cap" of
$150 per megawatt hour.
A soft cap means the price can exceed the prescribed amount as long as a
supplier can justify the charge.
REFUND ORDERS ARE RARE
"The granting of refunds by FERC is not a common occurrence," said Charles
Robinson, the ISO's general counsel. "We're treading new ground."
Considering the potential ramifications of the order, the commission was
oddly furtive in issuing its press release at the very end of the business
week.
The commission's press office already was closed by the time of the
announcement, and the commissioners had left for the day.
Reached at his home, Massey acknowledged that the commission was all but
inviting power companies to bury the commission in paperwork to support their
wholesale rates.
"Welcome to the Hebert chairmanship," he said.
Hebert was appointed head of the commission last month by President Bush.
Since then, the regulatory commission and the Bush administration have
maintained a largely hands-off approach to California's energy crisis.
"We have said from the beginning that obviously the state of California has
to address these problems and these challenges," U.S. Energy Secretary
Spencer Abraham said this week.
E-mail David Lazarus at [email protected] and Lynda Gledhill at
[email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1
=====================================
|
4,499 |
Subject: Re: SCE - Investment Banker Conference Call
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4121.
=====================================
FYI: I listened in on the analyst call. Bryson made it very clear that,
under the agreement, Edison would re-assume the procurement role on 12.31.02
and would "administer" (i.e., takeover) the DWR contracts. Seems pretty
clear that the State is actively looking for a strategy to exit the
procurement role.
Best,
Jeff
James D Steffes
04/12/2001 10:36 PM
To: Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: SCE - Investment Banker Conference Call
Not sure if you had seen this information. Looks like if the SCE deal is
approved, SCE would assume CDWR contracts.
Jim
---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 04/12/2001
10:35 PM ---------------------------
Robert Neustaedter@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
04/10/2001 02:21 PM
To: Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jennifer Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert
Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron,
Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Janel
Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: SCE - Investment Banker Conference Call
SCE held a conference call this morning to discuss the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) related to the sale of its transmission assets with
members of the investment community. After a brief description of major
provisions of the MOU, questions were taken. Following is a summary of that
call.
Major Components of Plan (repeatedly referred to as the "Governor's Plan")
Maintains cost-of-service treatment for utility retained generation for 10
years
Sale of transmission assets (or other assets) to CDWR
Dedication of the "Sunrise" generation project to cost-of-service based rates
for 10 years ($2 mm penalty if not on-line by August)
Provision of easements and potential conveyances in fee of certain lands (at
two hydro projects)
Provides for full recovery of $3.5 B utility net underrecovery as of 1/31/01
Commits SCE to spend $3 B in capital expenditures over 5 years
Dismissal of federal lawsuits by SCE
SCE will resume traditional utility procurement obligations by 1/1/03,
assuming CDWR contracts and entering into new purchase contracts as necessary
It was stressed that the MOU was a comprehensive plan to be treated as an
integrated package. While the CPUC and members of the legislature were
involved in various stages of the negotiation, the agreement is technically
between SCE and CDWR. Various regulatory and legislative approvals are
necessary for implementation of the MOU. SCE has rights to terminate the MOU
if the CPUC has not adopted specified "implementing decisions" within 60
days. Legislation necessary to implement certain provisions of the MOU must
be passed by August 15.
For ratemaking purposes the CPUC will grant SCE a 11.6% ROE on its generation
and distribution rate base.
Questions and Answers
What was expected timing of return to investment grade for SCE?
Up to the rating agencies. Many steps to go through. It is assumed agencies
will be following closely but timing is uncertain. Would have to be before
utility resumes power procurement obligations.
Applicability of 11.6% ROE?
ROE would increase from current 7% ROE to level no less than 11.6% for both
generation and distribution assets on unamortized balance at 12/31/00 and
capital structure roughly at 50/50.
Potential for write-offs?
While plan calls for full recovery of net undercollections as of 1/31/01,
because of timing issues SCE may take a write-off then have a "write-up" at a
later date.
Interest in how/why/impact of inclusion of Mission Sunrise generation project
(investor concern over market v. regulated returns)?
The state was looking at all options for long-term power contracts. Market
returns traded for security of long-term contract.
What will be source for $3 b capital investments over next 5 years?
Capital would come from retained earnings, borrowing and additional
investments from holding company.
Concern over ability of existing rate level (and "waterfall" disbursement) to
recover all costs especially if CDWR procurement costs increase?
Existing rates should cover all costs. Provisions in MOU allow adjustment
to rates to maintain investment grade status.
What was gained from MOU as opposed to pursuit through the courts?
Speed and certainty with respect to resolution of outstanding issues.
Will the sale be a taxable event?
Yes.
What is the URG unit cost?
$.042 per kwH.
In 2003 would SCE have ability to replace contracts of CDWR (when SCE resumes
procurement role)?
SCE would have ability to enter into new contracts, but would not ignore
obligations under CDWR contracts. New contracts would be subject to PUC
prudence review. SCE would file procurement plan with the PUC.
=====================================
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.