 on interest rates and the
portfolio approach with some short-term, some medium-term, and some long-term
debt. We usually don,t see anywhere near the same sophistication applied to
energy, even though in many cases, companies have a lot more risk exposure in
their energy purchases or procurement than they do in their debt portfolio.
On what boards should push for: I think the kind of questions board members
should be asking are: What is our policy on hedging fuel prices? Did we lock
in any of our energy prices? If not, why not? What are we doing about the
future? Have we looked at all of our conversion and control equipment and all
of our policies and procedures? Are they truly &best in class?8 Are we
getting advice from companies that are truly world-class in this area?
On energy as a corporate asset: Enron has a major business outsourcing energy
for large industrial and commercial companies. We go in and evaluate the
energy activity, the equipment, the control systems, and the procurement
policies. Even before the recent run-up in prices, we had yet to find a
well-run business where we couldn,t reduce energy usage and costs by 5% to
15%.
Most companies, even fairly energy-intensive companies, are not necessarily
world-class at managing their energy activities. It,s not a core competency.
It,s not where the best and the brightest want to spend much time. It,s also
not a place where many companies want to spend much capital. For all those
reasons, quite often the energy convergence and control equipment may not be
the latest and most efficient, and companies may not be using best practices.
We have looked at small companies, which may not be one-tenth or even
one-twentieth the size of Enron, that are exposing themselves to more
energy-related risk than Enron does worldwide. Usually they don,t know that
until they get a price spike. Then all of a sudden, it becomes a big factor
in why they aren,t meeting their earnings and cash-flow targets. In many
companies, energy is 10% to 20% of operating costs. If suddenly that rate
go

on interest rates and the
 portfolio approach with some short - condition, some average - term, and some long - condition
 debt. We normally don,t see anywhere near the same sophistication lend oneself to
 energy, even though in many cases, company have a lot more hazard exposure in
 their energy purchases or procurement than they do in their debt portfolio.
 On what control panel should push for: I think the kind of questions board members
 should be ask are: What is our policy on hedging fuel prices? Did we lock
 in any of our department of energy prices? If not, why not? What are we doing about the
 future? Have we expect at all of our conversion and dominance equipment and all
 of our policies and procedure? Are they truly &best in class?8 Are we
 getting advice from companies that are in truth world - class in this area?
 On energy as a corporate asset: Enron has a major business outsourcing energy
 for large industrial and commercial companies. We go in and evaluate the
 energy activity, the equipment, the control systems, and the procurement
 policies. Even before the late test - up in prices, we have however to find a
 well - run clientele where we couldn,t reduce energy usage and costs by 5% to
 15% .
 Most party, even fairly energy - intensive companies, are not necessarily
 world - class at do their energy activities. It,s not a core competency.
 It,s not where the effective and the brightest desire to spend much meter. It,s also
 not a place where many companies want to spend much das kapital. For all those
 reasons, quite often the energy convergence and control equipment may not be
 the latest and most efficient, and companies may not be use best practice.
 We have looked at minor companies, which may not be one - one-tenth or even
 one - twentieth the size of Enron, that are exposing themselves to more
 energy - related risk than Enron do worldwide. Usually they don,t know that
 until they get a price spike. Then all of a sudden, it become a big factor
 in why they aren,t meeting their earnings and cash - flow targets. In many
 companies, energy is 10% to 20% of operating costs. If abruptly that rate
 go

 on interest rates and the
kortfolio approack with vome sgort-term, some medium-term, and some loig-teem
devt. We usually don,t see anywhere near thw sanw sophistirztion ai'lied bo
enzrjy, even though ln many casas, companies hdvd c lot more risk exposure in
their enqrgy putcjases or procutemenu tran fhey do in their debt portfolio.
On what bmards should lush for: I think the kind lf qkestions board memhers
should be wwking are: Whxt is our konicy on hesging fuel prices? Did we lock
iv any of our engxty otices? If not, why got? What are we doinc about the
future? Haye we loiked at all of our coiversion and control equipmend cnd all
of our policiws and krocegurer? Ard tgeb tduly &bfst in class?8 Zre we
gettung advice from comkanyvx that are tduly wjrjd-class in this area?
On energy as a corkorats asset: Enron has a majir business outsourcijg energy
for large industrial and commercial companies. We go ii xnd eyaluxre the
energy activity, the equipment, the controj susnems, and the procmrement
policies. Efej ngfore the recevt run-bl jn prices, we had yft to fynd a
well-run fusimess where we couldn,t reducw energy usaye qnd costs by 5% to
15%.
Lost compannes, evgn faitly energy-intensive com'anies, are not nefessarily
dorld-class at mavagpng dheir entfgy activities. It,f not a cire eompetenzy.
Ij,s not rhere the hest and the brightest wwnt tl vpend much time. It,s also
not a place wherx many companoev wdnt to s'end mmch capital. For all those
reaxons, qunte ofgen the envrgy convxrgence and sontrol equipkgnt may not bx
the latqst qnd nost efwkcient, and comlanies maj uot be usung best practices.
We gave looked at wmaol companies, whoch mar jov be jte-tenth or eeen
une-geentidth the sizc ow Enton, that are exposinc thsmselves to more
emevgy-relatee risk tran Enron doex worldwide. Usuallj theb don,t know thwt
until they get a price spiks. Then alp on a sudden, it becimes a big fcctor
in why they aren,t meeting their eacnings and cash-flow tatgets. In many
companigs, tnergy is 10% to 20% of jperating costs. If suddenly tyat rate
go

on interest rates and the portfolio approach short-term, medium-term, and long-term debt. We the sophistication applied to even though in cases, companies have a lot more exposure in their energy purchases or procurement than they do in their debt On what boards should push for: I think the kind of questions board should asking What our policy on hedging fuel prices? Did we lock in any of our energy prices? If why not? What are we doing about the Have we looked at of our conversion and control and of our and Are truly &best in Are we getting advice from companies that are truly world-class in this area? On energy as a asset: Enron major business energy large and commercial companies. in and evaluate the energy activity, control systems, and the procurement policies. Even before recent run-up prices, we had yet to find well-run business where we couldn,t reduce energy usage costs by 5% to 15%. Most companies, even fairly energy-intensive companies, are not necessarily world-class their energy activities. It,s a core competency. not the and brightest want spend much time. It,s also not a place where many companies to spend much capital. For all those reasons, quite often convergence control equipment may be the latest and efficient, companies may not be practices. have companies, may be one-tenth or even the size of Enron, that exposing themselves to more worldwide. Usually they don,t know that until they a price spike. Then all of a it becomes a big factor in why they aren,t meeting their earnings cash-flow targets. companies, energy is 10% to 20% of operating If suddenly that rate

 on interest rates and the
portFolio approAch wiTh sOme ShOrt-tErm, sOme medium-term, aND somE long-term
debt. We usually Don,t sEe ANywhERe Near tHe same sOPhISTicAtIoN apPlIEd To
eneRgy, Even thoUgh in many cAseS, cOmpanies have A LoT more risk eXpoSure in
their eNerGy purcHaSes OR procUreMent tHan theY Do in thEir debt poRtFOlio.
On WHat boarDS ShOuld Push for: I think the kINd OF questions boarD membeRs
SHoULD be AskIng are: What Is Our poLIcy on heDGiNG FUel PRices? Did we locK
in any of our ENerGy pricEs? if nOT, why noT? What ArE We dOing about thE
futUre? Have we Looked AT all of oUR converSion anD coNtrOl eqUIpMeNt aNd ALl
oF OuR poLIciEs and proCeDuRes? ArE theY TRULy &beSt iN claSs?8 Are We
getting adviCe fRom cOMpaNies tHat arE truLy World-Class iN this ArEa?
On energy as a coRporAte asset: ENroN hAs a MaJor buSIness oUtsOurCing eneRgy
for lARge InDUSTrIal and commercial coMpANIeS. We go in aNd evalUAtE tHE
energy aCtIviTy, thE EQuipmEnt, tHE cOntrol syStems, aND tHe ProcureMeNt
poliCiEs. EVen BeforE The rEcent rUn-up in prIces, wE Had yet to find a
wELl-run business WHeRE We COuldN,t rEduce energy UsagE And cOsts BY 5% tO
15%.
MoST compAnies, EvEN fAIrly energy-intensive CoMpanieS, are nOt necessarily
World-class AT MAnaging tHeir ENeRGy activities. It,S not a Core competENcy.
It,s noT wherE the best And the briGHTest want To sPenD muCh tIME. IT,s also
not a plaCE WherE mAny compAniEs want tO spEnd MucH caPiTal. For all Those
reaSoNs, QuItE ofTen thE Energy coNvErgEnCe aNd conTRol equIpmenT may NoT bE
The Latest aND mOST effIcIeNt, anD coMpAnies May nOT be Using beSt practicEs.
WE Have LoOkEd at smaLl companies, whIcH may not be oNe-TenTh or evEN
One-twentIeth the size of Enron, that aRE exposiNg tHemseLves To more
eneRgy-RelateD riSK than ENron doEs worLdWidE. uSuallY THeY doN,t Know that
unTIL thEy get A pRice Spike. ThEn all of a sudden, it beCOmeS a big factor
in Why They AREn,T meETiNG thEiR EarNINgs and cash-flow tArgets. In maNy
COmPanies, enerGY is 10% To 20% Of operaTing cosTs. If sUDdenly tHat rate
go

 on interest rates and the
portfoli o app roa chwi th s omeshort-term, so m e me dium-term, and some lo ng-te rm
deb t .We us ually d o n , t  se ean ywh er e  n ear t hesame so phisticati onap plied to
en e rg y, even th oug h in many ca ses , comp an ies havea l ot mo re ris k  expos ure in
t he i r ener g y purch a s es  orprocurement thant he y  do in their d ebt po rt f ol i o . Onwhat board sshoul d  push f o r: I thi n k the kind of  questionsb oar d memb er s s houldbe as ki n g a re: What is  our  policy o n hedg i ng fuel prices?  Did w e l ock
in an yofou r  en e rg y p r ice s? If no t,  w hy no t? W h a t arewedoin g abo ut the
futur e?Have welooke d atallof  ourconver sionan d control equip ment  and all
of  o urpo licie s  and p roc edu res? Ar e theyt rul y & b es t in class?8 Arewe ge tting ad vice f r om  c o mpaniesth ataret r uly w orld - cl ass in t his ar e a?  On ener gy  as aco rpo rat e ass e t: E nron h as a maj or bu s iness outsourc i ng energy
fo r  l a r ge indu str ial and com merc i al c ompa n ie s.W e goin an de va l uate the
energy ac ti vity,the e quipment, the  control s y s t ems, and  the pr o curement
poli cies.  Even befo r e the re centrun-up i n prices, w e had ye t t o f ind  aw el l-run busines s wher ewe coul dn ,t redu ceene rgy  us ag e and cos ts by 5%  t o
1 5% . Mostc ompanies ,eve nfai rly e n ergy-i ntens iveco mp a nie s, aren ot n eces sa ri ly wor ld -clas s at man aging t heir ener gya ctiv it ie s. It, s not a coreco mpetency.
I t, s notw h ere thebest and the brightestw ant tospe nd mu ch t ime. It, s a lso
n ota  place  where  many  c omp a n ies w a n ttosp end much c a p ita l. Fo rallthose reasons, quite oft e n t he energy con ver genc e an d c o nt r oleq u ipm e n t may not be
t he latestan d  m ost effici e nt,  a nd comp anies m ay no t  be usi ng best p ractices.  We h a v e l ooked at s mall com panies, w h ich m a ynot b e o ne-ten th  or  even
one- t wen tieth  the s iz e of E nron,  t hat areexposing themselves tomore energ y-r elated ri skt han  Enron do es w orldwide.Usu all y the y d o n,tknow th atuntil  the y  get a pr i ce  sp i k e.  Then all o f a  su dden,  it become s abig factor
in wh y  they aren,tmeet i n g t hei r  ear ni ngs and cash-f low  t a r gets. In  m any
compan ies, ene rg y  is 1 0% to20% of  operat i n gc osts.If s udd enly that  ra te
go

 on_interest rates_and the
portfolio approach_with some_short-term,_some medium-term,_and_some long-term
debt._We usually don,t_see anywhere near the_same sophistication applied_to_
energy, even though in many cases, companies have a lot more risk exposure in_
their_energy purchases_or_procurement_than they do in their_debt portfolio.
On what boards_should push_for: I think the kind of questions board_members_
should be asking_are: What is our policy on hedging fuel prices?_Did we lock
in any of_our energy prices?_If_not,_why not? What are_we doing about the
future? Have_we looked at all of our_conversion and control equipment and all
of_our policies and procedures? Are they_truly &best in class?8 Are_we
getting_advice from companies that are_truly world-class in_this area?_
On energy as_a corporate asset: Enron has a_major business outsourcing_energy
for large industrial and commercial_companies._We go in_and_evaluate_the
energy_activity, the equipment,_the_control systems,_and_the procurement
policies. Even before the_recent_run-up in prices, we had yet to_find a
well-run business_where_we couldn,t reduce energy_usage and costs by 5%_to
15%.
Most companies, even fairly_energy-intensive companies,_are not_necessarily
world-class at managing their energy activities. It,s not a core_competency.
It,s not where the best_and the brightest want_to spend_much_time. It,s also_
not_a place_where many companies want to spend much_capital. For_all those
reasons, quite often the_energy convergence and control_equipment_may not be
the latest and_most efficient, and companies may not_be using best practices.
We_have_looked_at small companies, which may_not be one-tenth or even
one-twentieth_the size of_Enron, that are exposing themselves to more_
energy-related_risk than Enron does worldwide. Usually_they_don,t know that
until they get_a_price_spike. Then all of a_sudden, it becomes a big factor_
in why they aren,t meeting their earnings and cash-flow_targets. In many_
companies, energy is 10% to_20%_of_operating costs. If suddenly that rate
go


 exercised
during all market conditions, and that $6.2 billion of the allegedly
excessive power costs were billed when no Stage 3 emergency existed.
According to studies by the ISO's economists, suppliers used "well-planned"
strategies, including offering part of their capacity for sale at a much
higher price than other sellers. The ISO studied transactions involving 21
generating companies. It did not release the names of any of them. Leading
suppliers in California include Dynegy Inc., Duke Energy Corp., Reliant
Energy Inc., Williams Cos. and Enron Corp.
"The prices were above a normally competitive market," said Anjali Sherrin,
author of the ISO's analysis.
The $6.8 billion includes $562 million in alleged overcharges during December
and January. Of those, FERC has proposed refunding $69 million for January.
The power generators accused of the overcharges have until the end of today
to give tell FERC why they believe those charges were justified.
The ISO wants federal regulators to step in and stabilize the wholesale
electricity prices that have pushed Southern California Edison and Pacific
Gas & Electric Co. to the brink of insolvency.
Power companies that sell to the ISO and the utilities said they were
confident an independent examination will find that they did nothing wrong.
"We stand by our practices," said Richard Wheatley of Reliant Energy in
Houston, which owns about 8 percent of California's in-state generating
capacity. "We have operated legally and ethically at all times in
California."
FERC has been under fire from state and federal officials and lawmakers for
not being aggressive in dealing with the electricity crisis.
In recent weeks the agency has taken several actions, including proposing
refunds for January and February.
But those who have watched the agency over the years say the actions do not
yet signal a change of course from its posture of preferring to let the
markets work their will. "I think what they are trying to do is the minimal
amount possible, to say they are on top of the situation," said Bill Marcus,
an economist at JBS Energy in Sacramento, an energy and water-resources
consulting firm. "They'll probably figure out a way

exercised
 during all market conditions, and that $ 6.2 billion of the allegedly
 excessive power price were placard when no Stage 3 emergency existed.
 accord to studies by the ISO's economists, supplier used " well - planned "
 strategies, include offering part of their capacitance for sale at a much
 higher monetary value than other sellers. The ISO studied transactions involving 21
 generating companies. It did not release the name calling of any of them. Leading
 suppliers in California include Dynegy Inc., Duke Energy Corp., Reliant
 Energy Inc., Williams Cos. and Enron Corp.
 " The price were above a normally competitive market, " said Anjali Sherrin,
 author of the ISO's analysis.
 The $ 6.8 billion include $ 562 million in alleged overcharges during December
 and January. Of those, FERC has proposed refunding $ 69 million for January.
 The power generator accused of the overcharges have until the end of today
 to give tell FERC why they believe those charges were justified.
 The ISO wants federal regulators to step in and stabilize the wholesale
 electricity prices that have pushed Southern California Edison and Pacific
 Gas & Electric Co. to the verge of insolvency.
 ability companies that betray to the ISO and the utility said they were
 confident an independent interrogation will find that they did nothing wrong.
 " We stand by our practice, " said Richard Wheatley of Reliant Energy in
 Houston, which owns about 8 percent of California's in - state generating
 capacitance. " We have operated legally and ethically at all times in
 California. "
 FERC has been under fire from state and union officials and lawgiver for
 not being aggressive in dealing with the electricity crisis.
 In recent weeks the agency has taken several action, including proposing
 refunds for January and February.
 But those who have watch the agency over the years say the actions do not
 however signal a variety of course from its posture of preferring to let the
 markets exploit their will. " I remember what they are trying to dress is the minimal
 amount possible, to say they are on top of the situation, " say Bill Marcus,
 an economist at JBS Energy in Sacramento, an energy and water - resources
 consulting firm. " They'll probably figure out a way

 exfrcised
during all markeu conditions, and jhqt $6.2 binlion kf the aulegedly
excessive power cosvs wwre bulled when no Stage 3 eoergency vxisted.
Axcorving to studies ug the ISO's eckkomiscs, suppliers usec "well-planted"
strategies, ivcpuding offering part of their capacyty for swle at a much
rightr [rics than other sellers. The ISO studisd tranvactions invokving 21
generating companied. It did not release tje names of any if them. Leadkng
supplitrv in Califkrnia include Dynegy Inc., Duke Evergy Corp., Reliqnr
Ejgrgy Inc., Wiloiams Cos. and Enron Corp.
"Dhe prives were above a iormqlly competitive markxt," said Anjali Sherryn,
author oy the ISO's analysis.
Tye $6.8 bilnion incuyder $562 jikljon in almeged overdharges durung December
and Jamuwgu. Of those, FSRC haf [roposed refunding $69 million for January.
Ths power generators accuwed of the overcharged have uneil the end of today
to give tell FERC why they balievx ghowe zyagges were justified.
The ISO wants federal regtmauorx to step in akd stabilize the wnopexwle
electricijy pricza fhat have pushed Sluthern Calidornia Edyson and Pacific
Gas & Electric Xo. to the brpnk if insolvency.
Powex companies chat sgll to the ISO and the utilitnes sajd they werf
confidehg an independent exsmhnation will find that ther did notiing crong.
"We stamd by jur practifes," said Richard Wheatlej of Teliand Energy ij
Houston, which owns about 8 perrxnt of Califotnid's pn-state gzneratlng
capacity. "We have operated legallv and dthically zt all vimes in
Calyfornia."
FERC vws been undec fire frjm srate and feadral officials and lawmchers for
not being aggvessixs in dealing wick uhw electricity vriris.
Ij cecene weeks the acench hxx takdn several ccgionx, including proposinc
rerunds for January snq Februaty.
But thjse who have eatched the agency over thx yearx swy the actions do not
yet signzl a chanhe jf course frjm ibs pjsture of 'referring to let the
markets work their will. "I think whaj they are trying to bo is the minmmal
aiount posvible, to say they arw on top of the sltuation," said Bill Mardus,
an econlmist at JBS Energy in Sacramento, an energy and water-resources
consulting firm. "Vhqy'll probabmy fogure obt c way

exercised during all market conditions, and that of allegedly excessive costs were billed existed. to studies by ISO's economists, suppliers "well-planned" strategies, including offering part of capacity for sale at a much higher price than other sellers. The ISO transactions involving 21 generating companies. It did not release the names of any them. suppliers California Dynegy Inc., Duke Energy Corp., Reliant Energy Inc., Williams Cos. and Enron Corp. "The prices were a normally competitive market," said Anjali Sherrin, author the ISO's analysis. The billion includes $562 million in overcharges December and Of FERC proposed refunding $69 for January. The power generators accused of the overcharges have until the end of today to give FERC why those charges justified. ISO federal regulators to and stabilize the wholesale electricity prices Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to the of insolvency. Power companies that sell the ISO and the utilities said they were an independent examination will find that they did nothing wrong. "We stand by our practices," Wheatley of Reliant Energy Houston, which owns 8 of in-state capacity. "We operated legally and ethically at all times in California." FERC has under fire from state and federal officials and lawmakers for aggressive dealing with the crisis. In recent weeks agency taken several actions, including for and who watched agency over the years the actions do not yet a change of course to let the markets work their will. "I what they are trying to do is minimal amount possible, to say they are on top of the situation," Bill Marcus, at JBS Energy in Sacramento, an energy and consulting firm. "They'll probably out a way

 exercised
during all market cOnditions, aNd thaT $6.2 biLliOn Of thE allEgedly
excessivE PoweR costs were billed when no stage 3 EmERgenCY eXisteD.
AccordINg TO StuDiEs By tHe isO'S econOmiSts, suppLiers used "wEll-PlAnned"
strategIEs, Including oFfeRing part of thEir CapaciTy For SAle at A muCh
higHer priCE than oTher selleRs. tHe ISO sTUdied trANSaCtioNs involving 21
generaTInG Companies. It did Not relEaSE tHE NamEs oF any of them. leAding
SUpplierS In cALIfoRNia include DynEgy Inc., Duke ENErgY Corp., RElIanT
energy inc., WiLlIAms cos. and Enron corp.
"the prices Were abOVe a normALly compEtitivE maRkeT," saiD anJaLi SHeRRin,
AUtHor OF thE ISO's anaLySiS.
The $6.8 bIlliON INCludEs $562 mIlliOn in aLleged overchaRgeS durINg DEcembEr
and januArY. Of thOse, FERc has pRoPosed refunding $69 mIlliOn for JanuAry.
thE poWeR geneRAtors aCcuSed Of the ovErchargES haVe UNTIl The end of today
to givE tELL FeRC why thEy beliEVe ThOSe chargeS wEre JustIFIed.
ThE ISO WAnTs federaL regulAToRs To step iN aNd stabIlIze The WholeSAle
eLectriCity pricEs thaT Have pushed SoutHErn California eDiSON aND PacIfiC
Gas & ElectriC Co. tO The bRink OF iNsoLVency.
power CoMPaNIes that sell to the ISO AnD the utIlitiEs said they werE
confident AN INdependeNt exAMiNAtion will find tHat thEy did nothiNG wrong.
"We Stand By our praCtices," saiD rIchard WhEatLey Of REliANT ENergy in
HoustoN, WHich OwNs about 8 PerCent of CAliForNia'S in-StAte generaTing
capaCiTy. "we HaVe oPeratED legally AnD etHiCalLy at aLL times In
CalIforNiA."
FerC hAs been uNDeR FIre fRoM sTate And FeDeral OffiCIalS and lawMakers for
Not BEing AgGrEssive iN dealing with tHe ElectricitY cRisIs.
In reCENt weeks tHe agency has taken several ACtions, iNclUding PropOsing
refuNds For JanUarY And FebRuary.
BUt thoSe Who HAVe watCHEd The AgEncy over thE YEarS say tHe ActiOns do noT
yet signal a change oF CouRse from its posTurE of pREFeRriNG tO Let ThE
MarKETs work their will. "i think what ThEY aRe trying to DO is ThE minimaL
amount PossiBLe, to say They are on Top of the sItUatiON," SaiD Bill MarcuS,
an econoMist at JBS eNergy IN SAcramEntO, an eneRgY anD wateR-resouRCes
ConsuLting fIrM. "They'lL probAbLy figure Out a way

 exercised
during all mar ket condit ions,  an d t ha t $6 .2 b illion of thea lleg edly
excessive powercosts  w e re b i ll ed wh en no S t ag e 3 e me rg enc ye xi sted.
A ccordin g to studi esby  the ISO's e c on omists, su ppl iers used "w ell -plann ed " s trate gie s, in cludin g  offer ing partof theirc apacity f or  sal e at a much
high e rp rice than othe r sell er s .T h e I SOstudied tr an sacti o ns invo l vi n g 21generating co mpanies. It did  not r el eas e  the n amesof any  of them. L eadi ng
suppl iers i n  Califo r nia inc lude D yne gyInc. ,  D uk e E ne r gyC or p., Rel iant
En er gy  Inc. , Wi l l i a ms C os.  and  Enro n Corp.
"The  pr ices wer e abo ve anorm al ly co mpetit ive m ar ket," said Anja li S herrin, aut ho r o fthe I S O's an aly sis .
The$6.8 bi l lio ni n c lu des $562 million i na l le ged over charge s  d ur i ng Decem be r andJ a nuary . Of th ose, FER C hasp ro po sed ref un ding $ 69  mi lli on fo r  Jan uary.
The pow er ge n erators accuse d  of the overc h ar g e sh aveunt il the endof t o day
tog iv e t e ll FE RC wh yt he y  believe those char ge s were  just ified.
The I SO wants f e d e ral regu lato r st o step in andstabi lize the w h olesale
elec tricityprices th a t  have pu she d S out her n Ca lifornia Edis o n  and  P acific
Ga s & Ele ctr icCo.  to  t he brinkof insol ve nc y.  Pow er co m panies t ha t s el l t o the ISO an d the  uti li ti e s s aid the y  w e r e
c on fi dent  an  i ndepe nden t  ex aminati on will f ind that  t he y did n othing wrong.  "We standby  ou r prac t i ces," sa id Richard Wheatley ofR eliantEne rgy i n
H ouston, w hic h owns  ab o ut 8 p ercent  of C al ifo r n ia'si n -s tat egenerating cap acity ."Wehave op erated legally and eth ically at all  ti mesi n  Cal i fo r nia ."
FE R C  has been under  fire from  s t at e and fede r alof ficials  and la wmake r s for not being  aggressi ve  ind e ali ng with th e electr icity cri s is. I nrecen t w eeks t he  ag encyhas ta k ensever al act io ns, in cludi ng  proposi ng
refunds for January  and F ebrua ry.
But tho sew hohave watc hedthe agency  ov erthe y ear s  saythea ct ion s  do n ot y et signal acha n g eof course f r o m  it s pos tur e  of pr efer ring to let the m arkets work th eirw i ll.  "I thin kwhat they aretry in g to do is  t he minimal
amountpo s sible , to s ay the y are o n to p  of th e si tua tion," sa idBi l l Marcu s,  a n econ omis tat JBS  Energ y  inS a cramento, an ene rgy a n d  wate r -re sourc es
consu l ting  firm. "Th ey'll proba bly fi gure  outa way

 exercised_
during all_market conditions, and that_$6.2 billion_of_the allegedly_
excessive_power costs were_billed when no_Stage 3 emergency existed._
According to studies_by_the ISO's economists, suppliers used "well-planned"
strategies, including offering part of their capacity for_sale_at a_much_
higher_price than other sellers. The_ISO studied transactions involving 21_
generating companies._It did not release the names of any_of_them. Leading
suppliers_in California include Dynegy Inc., Duke Energy Corp., Reliant_
Energy Inc., Williams Cos. and Enron_Corp.
"The prices_were_above_a normally competitive market,"_said Anjali Sherrin,
author of the_ISO's analysis.
The $6.8 billion includes_$562 million in alleged overcharges during December_
and January. Of those, FERC has_proposed refunding $69 million for_January.
The_power generators accused of the_overcharges have until_the end_of today
to_give tell FERC why they believe_those charges were_justified.
The ISO wants federal regulators_to_step in and_stabilize_the_wholesale
electricity_prices that have_pushed_Southern California_Edison_and Pacific
Gas & Electric Co._to_the brink of insolvency.
Power companies that_sell to the ISO_and_the utilities said they_were
confident an independent examination_will find that they did nothing_wrong.
"We_stand by_our practices," said Richard Wheatley of Reliant Energy in
Houston, which_owns about 8 percent of California's_in-state generating
capacity. "We_have operated_legally_and ethically at_all_times in_
California."
FERC has been under fire from_state and_federal officials and lawmakers for
not_being aggressive in dealing_with_the electricity crisis.
In recent weeks_the agency has taken several actions,_including proposing
refunds for January_and_February._
But those who have watched_the agency over the years say_the actions do_not
yet signal a change of course_from_its posture of preferring to let_the_
markets work their will. "I think_what_they_are trying to do is_the minimal
amount possible, to say_they are on top of the situation," said Bill_Marcus,
an economist_at JBS Energy in Sacramento,_an_energy_and water-resources
consulting firm. "They'll probably figure out a way


s Jr., Rob;
> > > Rogers, Rex
> > > Subject:	Re: confirmation of agreement--Enron
> > >
> > > Russ--Clint is out today, but the confirmation document is fine
> except
> > > that there is a tweak we need to make to the definition of
> "material"
> > > information contained in the representation by Party B in the
> > > confirmation.  It should read as follows:
> > >
> > > 	"Material" information for these purposes is any information to
> > > which Party A would reasonably attach importance in entering into
> this
> > > Transaction or placing any order with respect to this Transaction.
> > >
> > >
> > > I assume this is satisfactory.  If not or you would otherwise like
> to
> > > discuss it, please contact Rex Rogers at 853-3069 since I will be
> out
> > > of the office later today.  Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > **********************************************************************
> > 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 enron.messaging.administration@enron.com 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.
> > **********************************************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of
> the designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not

s Jr., Rob;
 > > > Rogers, Rex
 > > > Subject: 	 Re: confirmation of agreement -- Enron
 > > >
 > > > Russ -- Clint is out today, but the confirmation text file is all right
 > except
 > > > that there be a tweak we necessitate to cause to the definition of
 > " material "
 > > > information contain in the theatrical performance by Party B in the
 > > > confirmation.   It should read as follows:
 > > >
 > > > 	 " Material " information for these purposes is any data to
 > > > which Party A would reasonably attach importance in entering into
 > this
 > > > Transaction or placing any club with respect to this Transaction.
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > I wear this is satisfactory.   If not or you would otherwise like
 > to
 > > > discourse it, please contact Rex Rogers at 853 - 3069 since I will be
 > out
 > > > of the office later today.   Thanks.
 > > >
 > > >
 > > >
 > >
 > >
 > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 > > This east - mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant
 > affiliate
 > > and may contain confidential and inside material for the lone use
 > of
 > > the intended recipient (sulfur). Any review, use, distribution or
 > disclosure by
 > > others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient role
 > (or
 > > authorize to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or
 > > reply to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and
 > > delete all copies of the message. This e - mail (and any attachment
 > hereto)
 > > are not intended to be an offer (or an toleration) and do not create
 > or
 > > evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or
 > any of
 > > its affiliates) and the intended recipient role or any other party, and may
 > not
 > > be trust on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or
 > > otherwise. Thank you.
 > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 >
 >
 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > ------
 > This message is intended merely for the personal and confidential use of
 > the designated recipient(s) named above.   If you are not

s Jg., Rob;
> > > Rogers, Rex
> > > Submect:	Re: confirmatnin of egreemeht--Enron
> > >
> > > Russ--Clint is out today, bnt tye cobfirmation document is fine
> excvpt
> > > thar thtre is a tweak we need to make fl thz vefinition of
> "msterial"
> > > hnformation cottxiued in the representation by Party B in the
> > > confirmation.  It xrouls read as follows:
> > >
> > > 	"Material" infkrmatioi for these purloses is any information tl
> > > ahich Party A woulf reasonabli ateqch importanze in entegnng into
> thjs
> > > Transaction or placing any ordex with respger tl this Transection.
> > >
> > >
> > > I assmke thiv is sayisfactory.  If nov or you would otherwise nike
> to
> > > discuss yt, please ckntact Rex Rogers ar 853-3069 sitce H wiuo bd
> oht
> > > of thf ohfice later today.  Thabks.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > **********************************************************************
> > This e-iqil is the prkperty os Enron Corp. and/or its relevant
> affiliaue
> > ahd may contain confidenrial and privileged mwterial fjr the sole use
> of
> > the intended recipient (s). Any seviex, jse, dlstrkvuhion or
> disclosure by
> > others is strictly prorjbotvd. If you are not the intendrd rrsipient
> (or
> > aothorizzs fo receive for the recipignt), plwase contwct yhe sender or
> > reply to Enrin Corp. at eurob.messaging.administxation@enron.cum amd
> > drlete all copies of the mesaage. This e-lail (and zvy attachments
> hdreno)
> > dre not intended to be an jffer (or en aceeptance) and do noe create
> og
> > evlgence a binding anf enflrweable conhract between Enron Corp. (or
> any of
> > its affiloades) and the intekded recipient jr any other pcrty, and may
> vot
> > be remied on by anyone ws the basis mv a contract by esto[pel or
> > otherwkre. Thank you.
> > **********************************************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> This mvsfage is intended only nor tfs personal and eubfidential use pf
> ghe dvsijnateq recipient(s) tamea acpve.  Kf you are kot

s Jr., Rob; > > > Rogers, > Subject: Re: of agreement--Enron > Russ--Clint out today, but confirmation document is > except > > > that is a tweak we need to make to the definition of > "material" > > information contained in the representation by Party B in the > > It read follows: > > > > > > "Material" information for these purposes is any information to > > which Party A would reasonably attach in entering into > > > > Transaction or any with respect this > > > > > > > I assume this is satisfactory. If not or you would otherwise like > to > > please contact Rogers 853-3069 I will be > > > of the office > > > > > > > > > > > > > ********************************************************************** > > e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or relevant > affiliate > > and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole of > > the recipient (s). Any use, or disclosure > > is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient > > > authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact or > reply to Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and > all copies of the e-mail any > are intended to be an (or an acceptance) and do create > or > enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or > any > > its affiliates) and the intended or any other party, and may > not > > be relied by anyone basis of a contract by estoppel or > otherwise. Thank you. > ********************************************************************** > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ------ > This is only for personal and confidential of > the recipient(s) named above. are not

s Jr., Rob;
> > > Rogers, Rex
> > > Subject:	Re: cOnfirmatioN of agReeMenT--ENron
> > >
> > > russ--clint is out todaY, But tHe confirmation document Is finE
> eXCept
> > > THaT therE is a tweAK wE NEed To MaKe tO tHE dEfiniTioN of
> "mateRial"
> > > informAtiOn Contained in tHE rEpresentatIon By Party B in thE
> > > coNfirmaTiOn.  IT ShoulD reAd as fOllows:
> > >
> > > 	"mAteriaL" informatIoN For theSE purposES Is Any iNformation to
> > > which pArTY A would reasonaBly attAcH ImPORtaNce In entering InTo
> thiS
> > > transacTIoN OR PlaCIng any order wiTh respect to THis transaCtIon.
> > >
> > >
> > > i Assume This iS sATisFactory.  If noT or yOu would otHerwisE Like
> to
> > > dIScuss it, Please ConTacT Rex rOgErS at 853-3069 SiNCe I WIlL be
> OUt
> > > oF the offiCe LaTer toDay.  THANKS.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > **********************************************************************
> > 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 enROn.messaging.adMInISTrATion@EnrOn.com 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.
> > **********************************************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> this mESsage iS inteNded OnLy FOr tHe persoNAl AND conFiDeNtiaL usE oF
> the dEsigNAteD recipiEnt(s) named AboVE.  If yOu ArE not

s Jr., Rob;
> > > Rogers,Rex
> > >Subje ct: 	Re :conf irma tion of agreem e nt-- Enron
> > >
> > > Russ --Cli nt is o u ttoday , but t h ec o nfi rm at ion  d o cu mentisfine
>except
> >  >th at there isa  t weak we ne edto make to t hedefini ti ono f
> " mat erial "
> >>  infor mation co nt a ined i n  the re p r es enta tion by Party B i n  t h e
> > > confir mation .It s hou ldread as fo ll ows:>  > >
>>  > " Mat e rial" informa tion for th e sepurpos es  is any in forma ti o n t o
> > > whi ch P arty A wo uld re a sonably attachimport anc e i n en t er in g i nt o
>t hi s
> > >  Transac ti on  or p laci n g a ny o rde r wi th re spect to this  Tr ansa c tio n.
>> >
>  > >
>  > >I assu me th is  is satisfactor y. If not or  yo uwou ld  othe r wise l ike
>to
> >> discu s s i t, p l ea se contact Rex Rog er s at  853-306 9 sinc e  I  w i ll be
>ou t
>  > > o f the  off i ce  later t oday.Th an ks.
> >  >
> > >
>  >>
>  >
>>
> >  ***** ******** ***** * ************** * ************* * ** * * ** * **** *** ********
>> Th i s e- mail is  th e  prop ertyof En r on Corp. and/or its  r elevan t
> a ffiliate
> >and may co n t a in confi dent i al and privileged  mate rial for t h e sole u se
>of
> > t he intend e d  recipie nt(s) . A nyr e vi ew, use, dist r i buti on  or
> d isc losureby> >  ot her sis strict ly prohi bi te d.  I f y ou ar e  not the  i nte nd edrecip i ent
>(or
>  > a ut ho r ize d to re c ei v e  for  t he  rec ipi en t), p leas e  co ntact t he sender  or > >re pl y to En ron Corp. aten ron.messag in g.a dminis t r ation@en ron.com and
> > deletea ll copi esof th e me ssage. Th ise-mail  (a n d anyattach ments
>  he r e to)
> >  a reno t intended t o b e anof fer(or anacceptance) and do not  create
> or> >  evi d e nc e a bi n din ga nde n forceable contr act betwee nE nr on Corp. ( o r
>  a ny of
>  > itsaffil i ates) a nd the in tended re ci pien t orany otherparty, a nd may
>n ot
>>  b e rel ied  on by  a nyo ne as  the b a sis  of a  contr ac t by e stopp el  or
> >otherwise. Thank you.
>  > *** ***** *** ********* *** * *** ********* **** ********** *** *** ***** *** * *****
>
> >--- - ----- ---- - --------- - -- --- - - -- ----------- - - - --- ----- --- - ------ ---- ---
> ------
> Th i s message is i nten d e d o nly forth e personal and  co nf i d ential u se  of
> the d esignate dr ecipi ent(s)  named  above. If you ar e no t

s Jr.,_Rob;
> >_> Rogers, Rex
> >_> Subject:	Re:_confirmation_of agreement--Enron
>_>_>
> > >_Russ--Clint is out_today, but the confirmation_document is fine
>_except
>_> > that there is a tweak we need to make to the definition_of
>_"material"
> >_>_information_contained in the representation by_Party B in the
> >_> confirmation._ It should read as follows:
> > >
>_>_> 	"Material" information_for these purposes is any information to
> > >_which Party A would reasonably attach_importance in entering_into
>_this
>_> > Transaction or_placing any order with respect to_this Transaction.
> > >
> > >
>_> > I assume this is satisfactory._ If not or you would_otherwise like
> to
> > >_discuss it,_please contact Rex Rogers at_853-3069 since I_will be
>_out
> > >_of the office later today. _Thanks.
> > >
>_> >
> > >
> >
> >
>_>_**********************************************************************
> > 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 enron.messaging.administration@enron.com 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.
> > **********************************************************************
>
>
>_------------------------------------------------------------------------
>_------
> This message is intended only_for_the_personal and confidential use of
>_the designated recipient(s) named above. _If you are not


for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to
pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities.
?????"We are working at a good pace," said Fichera, chief executive of the
New York firm Saber Partners. "... If we get to a deal-breaker, it might
be longer."
?????By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public
Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis
administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is
being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis.
?????Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers
stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying
electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and
North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy
suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's
electricity.
?????The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the
cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power
units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and
PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of
cash.
?????Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the
alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing
with "almost 700 individual contractors."
?????Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin
(R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative
plan to lower the small producers' prices, was "the huge enmity...
manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people
just don't like each other."
?????This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis
administration:
?????* When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt
counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can
make the difference between full power and blackouts.
?????* There is no such

for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the department of state has have to
 pore over 80,000 documents just to tax the utilities' liabilities.
? ?? ?? " We are work at a good pace, " say Fichera, chief executive of the
 New York firm Saber Partners. "... If we get to a hand - breaker, it might
 be longer. "
? ?? ?? By make Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public
 Utilities Commission, available to reporter Tuesday, the Davis
 administration was intelligibly try on to reassure the public that progress is
 being made on the governor's design to pull the state out of the crisis.
? ?? ?? Since mid - January, when the large utilities' recognition failed and suppliers
 stopped selling to them, the state has spend nearly $ 3 billion buying
 electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and
 North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy
 suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's
 electricity.
? ?? ?? The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the
 cash - strapped alternate supplier, including solar, biomass and wind power
 unit, cut their normal supply to the system in one-half. They say Edison and
 PG&E have not pay them since November; the utilities say they are out of
 cash.
? ?? ?? Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D - Boulder Creek) say the plight of the
 alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing
 with " almost 700 individual contractor. "
? ?? ?? Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin
 (R - La Quinta) influence for almost three calendar month to come up with a legislative
 plan to lower the small producers' price, was " the huge enmity...
 manifested between the utilities and the modification facilities. These people
 just don't like each early. "
? ?? ?? This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis
 presidency:
? ?? ?? * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't count -- every kilowatt
 counts. During peak use, a small wind exponent facility in Riverside County can
 make the remainder between entire power and blackout.
? ?? ?? * There is no such

for months. To research the nrid purchase, Fieyera seid, the state hxs had to
pore over 80,000 documenvs jyst ti assess the utilities' liabilitpes.
?????"We are worjung at a good pace," said Rlcherc, rhief executive of the
Nef York firm Satef 'artners. "... If we get to a deal-breaker, it mignt
be longer."
?????By mwkinb Ficgvrc, who is also a consultant to tge Texav Public
Utiloties Commission, available to geporters Tuesday, hhe Davis
aeminywtration was clearly tgving to reaasure the public that progress ks
benng made on tye hmvernor's plen to iull the statc out ox the ctisis.
?????Since mid-Manuacy, wyen the big utilities' credit failed and supplierv
atopped selling ti rhem, jhe sdate yas sptnt nsarly $3 bimlion buyihg
electricuty from a handful pf oarge supplieds in Eevas, Oklahoma, Georgia and
North Carolina. Nof a cent has gone to thw hundreds of alternajive energr
suppliers in California who provide about a quaster kw tkc rrahe's
electricity.
?????The Monday and Tuesday blackouea pcburred partly beccuse many of the
cwsn-ftrapped altetnative sulpliers, including dolar, byomasw and winq poeer
units, cut their normal wupply to thv sywtem in half. They day Edison cnd
PG&G have not paid them since Norember; the utilitles say tgdy are out of
carh.
?????Axsamblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulqer Creek) saib the plkght of thq
alternatlve sm[pliers has draggef on yecauve of the fomplexity of dealing
with "almost 700 individual cmntgactors."
?????Anjther delaying faceor, said Keelei, who witk statd Sen. Jim Gattin
(C-La Quinta) wjrked for almmdt three monvhs to coie up wirh a leekslative
plan yo lower nht small priducers' prices, was "thg guge enmity...
mannyewted between thr ugilytpes agg the qualiffing fazolitids. Thest pcopue
jist don't like each odher."
?????Fhis week's blackouys providee two paynful lessons for the Davis
admlnistcation:
?????* When it comes to electricity, size doean't matteg--evcry kilowatt
sounbs. Doring peak bse, a small wind power facility in Riverwide County can
maje the difference bgtwten full powec and flackouts.
?????* There is no such

for months. To research the grid purchase, the has had pore over 80,000 utilities' ?????"We are working a good pace," Fichera, chief executive of the New firm Saber Partners. "... If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be ?????By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities available reporters the administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's to pull the state out of the crisis. mid-January, when the big credit failed and suppliers stopped to the state spent $3 buying electricity from handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to hundreds of suppliers in who about quarter of the ?????The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass wind power cut their normal supply to the in half. They say Edison and PG&E have paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. ?????Assemblyman Fred Keeley said the plight of alternative suppliers has on of complexity dealing with 700 individual contractors." ?????Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to with legislative plan to the small producers' prices, "the enmity... manifested between the the facilities. don't each ?????This week's blackouts provided painful lessons for the Davis ?????* When it comes kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind facility in Riverside County can make the between full power and blackouts. ?????* There is no such

for months. To research the griD purchase, FIcherA saId, tHe StatE has Had to
pore over 80,000 dOCumeNts just to assess the utilIties' LiABiliTIeS.
?????"We arE workinG At A GOod PaCe," SaiD FIChEra, chIef ExecutiVe of the
New yorK fIrm Saber PartNErS. "... If we get to A deAl-breaker, it mIghT
be lonGeR."
?????By MAking ficHera, wHo is alSO a consUltant to tHe tExas PuBLic
UtilITIeS ComMission, available tO RePOrters Tuesday, tHe DaviS
aDMiNIStrAtiOn was clearLy TryinG To reassURe THE PubLIc that progresS is
being madE On tHe goveRnOr's PLan to pUll thE sTAte Out of the criSis.
?????SInce mid-JaNuary, wHEn the biG UtilitiEs' credIt fAilEd anD SuPpLieRs
STopPEd SelLIng To them, thE sTaTe has SpenT NEARly $3 bIllIon bUying
Electricity frOm a HandFUl oF largE suppLierS iN TexaS, OklahOma, GeOrGia and
North CaroLina. not a cent hAs gOnE to ThE hundREds of aLteRnaTive eneRgy
suppLIerS iN cALiFornia who provide abOuT A QuArter of tHe statE'S
eLeCTricity.
?????THe monDay aND tuesdAy blACkOuts occuRred paRTlY bEcause mAnY of the
CaSh-sTraPped aLTernAtive sUppliers, IncluDIng solar, biomasS And wind power
uNItS, CUt THeir NorMal supply to The sYStem In haLF. THey SAy EdiSon anD
Pg&e hAVe not paid them since NOvEmber; tHe utiLities say they Are out of
caSH.
?????aSsemblymAn FrED KEEley (D-Boulder CrEek) saId the plighT Of the
altErnatIve supplIers has drAGGed on becAusE of The ComPLExIty of dealing
wITH "almOsT 700 indiviDuaL contraCtoRs."
?????ANotHer DeLaying facTor, said KEeLeY, wHo WitH statE sen. Jim BaTtIn
(R-la quiNta) woRKed for AlmosT thrEe MoNThs To come uP WiTH A legIsLaTive
PlaN tO loweR the SMalL producErs' prices, Was "THe huGe EnMity...
manIfested betweeN tHe utilitieS aNd tHe qualIFYing faciLities. These people
just doN'T like eaCh oTher."
?????THis wEek's blackOutS proviDed TWo painFul lesSons fOr The dAVis
adMINiStrAtIon:
?????* When it cOMEs tO elecTrIcitY, size doEsn't matter--every kilOWatT
counts. During PeaK use, A SMaLl wINd POweR fACilITY in Riverside CouNty can
make ThE DiFference beTWeeN fUll poweR and blaCkoutS.
?????* there is No such

for months. To research th e grid pur chase , F ich er a sa id,the state hash ad t o
pore over 80,000 do cumen ts just to  asse ss theu ti l i tie s'  l iab il i ti es.
? ??? ?"We ar e workingatagood pace,"s ai d Fichera,  ch ief executiv e o f the
N ewY ork f irm  Sabe r Part n ers. " ... If we  g e t to a deal-br e a ke r, i t might
be longe r ." ?????By making  Fiche ra ,  w h o  is  al so a consu lt ant t o  the Te x as P u bli c
Utilities C ommission,a vai lableto  re p orters  Tues da y , t he Davis
a dmin istration  was c l early t r ying to  reass ure  th e pu b li ctha tp rog r es s i s
b eing mad eon  thegove r n o r 's p lan  topullthe state out  of  the cri sis.????? Sinc emid-J anuary , whe nthe big utiliti es'credit fa ile dand  s uppli e rs
st opp edselling  to the m , t he s t at e has spent nearly  $ 3 bi llion bu ying e le ct r icity fr om  ahand f u l oflarg e  s uppliers  in Te x as ,Oklahom a,  Georg ia  an d North Caro lina.Not a ce nt ha s  gone to the h u ndreds of alt e rn a t iv e  ene rgy
suppliers  inC alif orni a  w hop rovid e abo ut aq uarter of the state 's
elec trici ty.
?????TheMonday and T u esday bl acko u ts occurred partl y bec ause manyo f the
c ash-s trappedalternati v e  supplie rs,  in clu din g so lar, biomassa n d wi nd  power
un its, cu t t hei r n orm al  supply t o the sy st em  i nhal f. Th e y say Ed is onan d PG&Eh ave no t pai d th em  s i nce  Novemb e r; t he u ti li ties  sa ytheyareo utof
cas h.
?????A sse m blym an  F red Kee ley (D-Boulde rCreek) sai dthe  pligh t of the alternative suppliers h a s dragg edon be caus e of thecom plexit y o f  deali ng
wi th "a lm ost 7 00 in d i vi dua lcontractor s . "
? ????A no ther  delayi ng factor, said Ke e ley , who with st ate  Sen . Ji m B a tt i n (R - LaQ u inta) worked fo r almost t hr e emonths toc ome  u p witha legis lativ e
planto lowerthe small  p rodu c e rs'  prices, w as "thehuge enmi t y...ma nifes ted  betwe en  th e uti lities and  thequalif yi ng fac iliti es . Thesepeople
just don't like  eachother ."?????This  we e k's  blackout s pr ovided two  pa inf ul le sso n s for  the Da vis
admi nist r ation:
?? ? ?? * W h e nit comes to e l ect ricit y,s ize do esn' t matter--every k i lowatt
counts . Du r i ngpea k  use ,a small wind p owe rf a cility i nRiverside C ounty ca nmakethe di fferen ce betw e e nf ull po werand  blackout s.?? ? ??* The re  i s  no su ch

for months._To research_the grid purchase, Fichera_said, the_state_has had_to_
pore over 80,000_documents just to_assess the utilities' liabilities.
?????"We_are working at_a_good pace," said Fichera, chief executive of the
New York firm Saber Partners. "..._If_we get_to_a_deal-breaker, it might
be longer."
?????By_making Fichera, who is also_a consultant_to the Texas Public
Utilities Commission, available to_reporters_Tuesday, the Davis_
administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that_progress is
being made on the_governor's plan to_pull_the_state out of the_crisis.
?????Since mid-January, when the big utilities'_credit failed and suppliers
stopped selling_to them, the state has spent nearly_$3 billion buying
electricity from a_handful of large suppliers in_Texas, Oklahoma,_Georgia and
North Carolina. Not_a cent has_gone to_the hundreds of_alternative energy
suppliers in California who_provide about a_quarter of the state's
electricity.
?????The Monday_and_Tuesday blackouts occurred_partly_because_many of_the
cash-strapped alternative_suppliers,_including solar,_biomass_and wind power
units, cut their_normal_supply to the system in half. They_say Edison and
PG&E_have_not paid them since_November; the utilities say they_are out of
cash.
?????Assemblyman Fred Keeley_(D-Boulder Creek)_said the_plight of the
alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the_complexity of dealing
with "almost 700_individual contractors."
?????Another delaying factor,_said Keeley,_who_with state Sen._Jim_Battin
(R-La_Quinta) worked for almost three months to_come up_with a legislative
plan to lower_the small producers' prices,_was_"the huge enmity...
manifested between the_utilities and the qualifying facilities. These_people
just don't like each_other."
?????This_week's_blackouts provided two painful lessons_for the Davis
administration:
?????* When it_comes to electricity,_size doesn't matter--every kilowatt
counts. During peak_use,_a small wind power facility in_Riverside_County can
make the difference between_full_power_and blackouts.
?????* There is no_such


&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&p
a=0&e=S

Cancer
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=7&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&p
a=0&e=S

Capricorn
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=8&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&p
a=0&e=S

Leo
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=9&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&p
a=0&e=S

Aquarius
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=10&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&
pa=0&e=S

Virgo
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=11&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&
pa=0&e=S

Pisces
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=12&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&
pa=0&e=S

Getting Ahead Guide

Do You Have What It Takes?
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=13&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&
pa=0&e=S

Becoming a Great Manager
http://ww1.lfmn.com/actv/sr2.asp?u=932861&v=3787&url=14&c=125139&pr=1007&cf=1&
pa=0


, Tenn, Mia, Fla, FSU, A&M)
Brandon Jones, 6-3, 205, 4.4, Texark. Liberty-Eylau (Ky, Ark, A&M, FSU, UT)
Bennie Brazell, 6-2, 168, 4.4, Houston Westbury (LSU, UCLA, Ark, Ky, LSU, Mia)
Thomson Omboga, 6-2, 175, 4.5, Grand Prairie (UT, OU, ND, Ga, A&M, Mo)
Cedric Williams, 6-0, 170, 4.4, Jefferson (KSU, FSU, LSU, Neb, A&M, OU)
Keith Mills, 5-11, 175, 4.4, Garland (A&M, UT, FSU, Fla, Ark, TT, OU)
* * * *
Terrence Thomas, 5-9, 175, 4.4, Houston Washington (Mia, FSU, UCLa, A&M, UH)
Corey Roberts, 6-4, 190, 4.4, Carthage (LSU, A&M, SMU, TCU, UT)
Jesse Woods, 6-4, 190, 4.5, Katy Taylor (A&M Commitment)
Kenneth Shelton, 6-1, 175, 4.4, Port Arthur Jefferson (A&M, OU, TT, UT)

Offensive Line (13)
Jonathan Scott, 6-7, 290, 4.9, Dallas Carter (UT Commitment)
Jami Hightower, 6-4, 295, 5.2, Jacksonville (UT, A&M, FSU, OSU, TCU)
Ben Wilkerson, 6-4, 265, 4.9, Hemphill (A&M, Mich, ND, Neb, Ark, LSU, OU)
Abe Robinson, 6-6, 270, 4.9, Jersey Village (UT Commitment)
William Winston, 6-6, 330, 5.3, Houston Madison (A&M, UT, LSU, Mia, Syr)
Mike Garcia, 6-5, 280, 5.2, Galena Park (UT Commitment)
* * * *
Will Allen

, Tenn, Mia, Fla, FSU, A&M)
 Brandon Jones, 6 - 3, 205, 4.4, Texark. Liberty - Eylau (Ky, Ark, A&M, FSU, UT)
 Bennie Brazell, 6 - 2, 168, 4.4, Houston Westbury (LSU, UCLA, Ark, Ky, LSU, Mia)
 Thomson Omboga, 6 - 2, 175, 4.5, Grand Prairie (UT, OU, ND, Ga, A&M, Mo)
 Cedric Williams, 6 - 0, 170, 4.4, Jefferson (KSU, FSU, LSU, Neb, A&M, OU)
 Keith Mills, 5 - 11, 175, 4.4, Garland (A&M, UT, FSU, Fla, Ark, TT, OU)
 * * * *
 Terrence Thomas, 5 - 9, 175, 4.4, Houston Washington (Mia, FSU, UCLa, A&M, UH)
 Corey Roberts, 6 - 4, 190, 4.4, Carthage (LSU, A&M, SMU, TCU, UT)
 Jesse Woods, 6 - 4, 190, 4.5, Katy Taylor (A&M Commitment)
 Kenneth Shelton, 6 - 1, 175, 4.4, Port Arthur Jefferson (A&M, OU, TT, UT)

 Offensive Line (13)
 Jonathan Scott, 6 - 7, 290, 4.9, Dallas Carter (UT Commitment)
 Jami Hightower, 6 - 4, 295, 5.2, Jacksonville (UT, A&M, FSU, OSU, TCU)
 Ben Wilkerson, 6 - 4, 265, 4.9, Hemphill (A&M, Mich, ND, Neb, Ark, LSU, OU)
 Abe Robinson, 6 - 6, 270, 4.9, Jersey Village (UT Commitment)
 William Winston, 6 - 6, 330, 5.3, Houston Madison (A&M, UT, LSU, Mia, Syr)
 Mike Garcia, 6 - 5, 280, 5.2, Galena Park (UT Commitment)
 * * * *
 Will Allen

, Tejn, Mia, Fla, FSU, A&M)
Brandon Jones, 6-3, 205, 4.4, Texark. Libervy-Eylau (Ky, Ark, X&M, FSU, UT)
Bennie Brazell, 6-2, 168, 4.4, Hluwton Qestbury (LSU, UCLA, Ark, Yy, LSU, Miw)
Thomson Ombita, 6-2, 175, 4.5, Granv Prairic (UT, KM, ND, Ya, A&M, Mo)
Cedric Wllliams, 6-0, 170, 4.4, Befferson (KSU, XSJ, PSU, Neb, A&M, OU)
Keith Mills, 5-11, 175, 4.4, Garland (A&M, UT, GSK, Fla, Ark, TT, OO)
* * * *
Ttrrqnce Nhimas, 5-9, 175, 4.4, Houston Washington (Miz, FSU, UBLa, A&M, UH)
Corey Ronerts, 6-4, 190, 4.4, Carthage (LSU, A&M, SLU, TFU, UT)
Jesse Woods, 6-4, 190, 4.5, Katy Taylir (A&I Commitment)
Kdnneth Shelton, 6-1, 175, 4.4, Port Arthur Jefferson (A&M, OU, TT, UT)

Ofwensire Line (13)
Jonqtyan Vcott, 6-7, 290, 4.9, Daolas Barter (UT Commitment)
Jdmi Higntower, 6-4, 295, 5.2, Jackxontillw (UT, A&M, FSU, OSU, TCU)
Bei Wilkerson, 6-4, 265, 4.9, Hemphyll (A&M, Miwh, ND, Neb, Ark, LSU, OY)
Ave Rotinsmn, 6-6, 270, 4.9, Jefseg Tilmage (UH Ckmmitment)
Wjlliam Winsron, 6-6, 330, 5.3, Houston Madixog (A&M, UT, LSU, Miz, Syr)
Mykq Garcia, 6-5, 280, 5.2, Galena Park (UT Commitment)
* * * *
Wiml Allen

, Tenn, Mia, Fla, FSU, A&M) Brandon 205, Texark. Liberty-Eylau Ark, A&M, FSU, 4.4, Westbury (LSU, UCLA, Ky, LSU, Mia) Omboga, 6-2, 175, 4.5, Grand Prairie OU, ND, Ga, A&M, Mo) Cedric Williams, 6-0, 170, 4.4, Jefferson (KSU, FSU, Neb, A&M, OU) Keith Mills, 5-11, 175, 4.4, Garland (A&M, UT, FSU, Fla, TT, * * Terrence Thomas, 5-9, 175, 4.4, Houston Washington (Mia, FSU, UCLa, A&M, UH) Corey Roberts, 6-4, 190, Carthage (LSU, A&M, SMU, TCU, UT) Jesse Woods, 190, 4.5, Katy Taylor Commitment) Kenneth Shelton, 6-1, 175, Port Jefferson (A&M, TT, Offensive (13) Jonathan Scott, 290, 4.9, Dallas Carter (UT Commitment) Jami Hightower, 6-4, 295, 5.2, Jacksonville (UT, A&M, FSU, OSU, TCU) Wilkerson, 6-4, Hemphill (A&M, ND, Ark, OU) Abe Robinson, 4.9, Jersey Village (UT Commitment) William 5.3, Houston Madison (A&M, UT, LSU, Mia, Syr) Garcia, 6-5, 5.2, Galena Park (UT Commitment) * * * Will Allen

, Tenn, Mia, Fla, FSU, A&M)
Brandon JonEs, 6-3, 205, 4.4, Texark. LiBerty-eylAu (KY, ARk, A&M, fSU, Ut)
Bennie Brazell, 6-2, 168, 4.4, hOustOn Westbury (LSU, UCLA, Ark, Ky, lSU, MiA)
THOmsoN omBoga, 6-2, 175, 4.5, GRand PraIRiE (ut, OU, nD, ga, a&M, MO)
CEDrIc WilLiaMs, 6-0, 170, 4.4, JeffeRson (KSU, FSU, lSU, neB, A&M, OU)
Keith MiLLs, 5-11, 175, 4.4, garland (A&M, Ut, FSu, Fla, Ark, TT, OU)
* * * *
TErrEnce ThOmAs, 5-9, 175, 4.4, HOUston wasHingtOn (Mia, Fsu, UCLa, A&m, UH)
Corey RObERts, 6-4, 190, 4.4, CarTHage (LSU, a&m, sMu, TCU, uT)
Jesse Woods, 6-4, 190, 4.5, Katy TAYlOR (A&M Commitment)
KEnneth shELtON, 6-1, 175, 4.4, porT ArThur JefferSoN (A&M, OU, tt, UT)

OffeNSiVE lIne (13)
jOnathan Scott, 6-7, 290, 4.9, DAllas Carter (ut CoMmitmeNt)
jamI hightoWer, 6-4, 295, 5.2, JaCkSOnvIlle (UT, A&M, FSU, oSU, TcU)
Ben WilkErson, 6-4, 265, 4.9, HEMphill (A&m, mich, ND, NEb, Ark, LsU, Ou)
AbE RobINsOn, 6-6, 270, 4.9, jerSeY vilLAgE (UT cOmmItment)
WiLlIaM WinsTon, 6-6, 330, 5.3, HOUSTOn MaDisOn (A&M, uT, LSU, mia, Syr)
Mike GarCia, 6-5, 280, 5.2, galeNA PaRk (UT COmmitMent)
* * * *
wiLl AllEn

, Tenn, Mia, Fla, FSU, A&M )
BrandonJones , 6 -3,  2 05,4.4,  Texark. Liber t y-Ey lau (Ky, Ark, A&M, FSU , UT)
B e nnie Br azell , 6-2,1 68 , 4.4 ,Ho ust on We stbur y ( LSU, UC LA, Ark, K y,LS U, Mia)
Thom s on  Omboga, 6 -2,  175, 4.5, G ran d Prai ri e ( U T, OU , N D, Ga , A&M, Mo)
Ce dric Will ia m s, 6-0 ,  170, 4 . 4 ,Jeff erson (KSU, FSU,L SU ,  Neb, A&M, OU)
Keith  M i ll s ,  5- 11,  175, 4.4,  G arlan d  (A&M,U T, F S U,F la, Ark, TT,OU)
* * * * Ter renceTh oma s , 5-9,  175,  4 . 4,Houston Was hing ton (Mia,  FSU,U CLa, A& M , UH)
C orey R obe rts , 6- 4 ,19 0,4. 4 , C a rt hag e  (L SU, A&M,  S MU , TCU , UT ) J e sseWoo ds,6-4,190, 4.5, Kat y T aylo r  (A &M Co mmitm ent)
K ennet h Shel ton,6- 1, 175, 4.4, Po rt A rthur Jef fer so n ( A& M, OU ,  TT, U T)
Of fensive  Line ( 1 3)Jo n a t ha n Scott, 6-7, 290,  4 . 9 ,Dallas C arter( UT  C o mmitment )Jam i Hi g h tower , 6- 4 ,295, 5.2 , Jack s on vi lle (UT ,A&M, F SU , O SU,  TCU) BenWilker son, 6-4 , 265 ,  4.9, Hemphill (A&M, Mich, N D ,N e b, Ark,  LS U, OU)
AbeRobi n son,  6-6 ,  2 70, 4.9,Jerse yV il l age (UT Commitment)
W illiam  Wins ton, 6-6, 330 , 5.3, Hou s t o n Madiso n (A & M, UT, LSU, Mia,Syr)Mike Garci a , 6-5, 2 80, 5 .2, Gale na Park ( U T  Commitm ent )
*  ** * W il l Allen

, Tenn,_Mia, Fla,_FSU, A&M)
Brandon Jones, 6-3,_205, 4.4,_Texark._Liberty-Eylau (Ky,_Ark,_A&M, FSU, UT)
Bennie_Brazell, 6-2, 168,_4.4, Houston Westbury (LSU,_UCLA, Ark, Ky,_LSU,_Mia)
Thomson Omboga, 6-2, 175, 4.5, Grand Prairie (UT, OU, ND, Ga, A&M, Mo)
Cedric Williams,_6-0,_170, 4.4,_Jefferson_(KSU,_FSU, LSU, Neb, A&M, OU)
Keith_Mills, 5-11, 175, 4.4, Garland_(A&M, UT,_FSU, Fla, Ark, TT, OU)
* * * *
Terrence_Thomas,_5-9, 175, 4.4,_Houston Washington (Mia, FSU, UCLa, A&M, UH)
Corey Roberts, 6-4,_190, 4.4, Carthage (LSU, A&M, SMU,_TCU, UT)
Jesse Woods,_6-4,_190,_4.5, Katy Taylor (A&M_Commitment)
Kenneth Shelton, 6-1, 175, 4.4, Port_Arthur Jefferson (A&M, OU, TT, UT)

Offensive_Line (13)
Jonathan Scott, 6-7, 290, 4.9, Dallas_Carter (UT Commitment)
Jami Hightower, 6-4, 295,_5.2, Jacksonville (UT, A&M, FSU,_OSU, TCU)
Ben_Wilkerson, 6-4, 265, 4.9, Hemphill_(A&M, Mich, ND,_Neb, Ark,_LSU, OU)
Abe Robinson,_6-6, 270, 4.9, Jersey Village (UT_Commitment)
William Winston, 6-6,_330, 5.3, Houston Madison (A&M, UT,_LSU,_Mia, Syr)
Mike Garcia,_6-5,_280,_5.2, Galena_Park (UT Commitment)
*_*_* *
Will_Allen


gate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/17/M
N170717.DTL
Sacramento -- Power generators may have overcharged Californians $55 million
in wholesale electricity sales during February, federal regulators said
yesterday.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ordered six energy suppliers to
explain their pricing by Friday. If the commission doesn't accept the
explanations, it could order the firms to refund the money.
The order marked the third time in a week that the commission accused
generators of overcharging or manipulating prices during California's energy
crisis.
Last Friday, it ordered 13 suppliers to justify their prices or refund as
much as $69 million for sales in January. On Wednesday, the commission
demanded to know why two generators withheld power from two of their
so-called must-run plants last spring, forcing power grid operators to buy
electricity at higher rates from other plants operated by the companies.
Critics of the commission said the potential refund described in yesterday's
order is too small, particularly when the state paid more than $1. 5 billion
to buy electricity in February.
"The significance is how insignificant the proposed refund is," said Michael
Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumer Action Network in San
Diego.
"(The commission) is doing less than something," Shames said. "The proposed
order creates a sham that FERC is providing some kind of discipline on this
out-of-control market, when in fact it's not."
Two companies, Dynegy and Williams Energy, accounted for a combined $45
million of the possible $55 million in overcharges cited by the commission
yesterday.
They also represent more than 10,105 of the 11,204 transactions that the
regulators said may have been overpriced.
Other companies named were Duke Energy, Portland General Electric Company,
Reliant and Mirant.
Power suppliers have steadfastly denied price gouging, saying that short
supply and the weak financial condition of the state's two largest utilities
led to increased prices.
State politicians have repeatedly said that part of California's power woes
are caused

gate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/17/M
 N170717.DTL
 Sacramento -- Power generators may have overcharged Californians $ 55 million
 in wholesale electricity sale during February, union regulators said
 yesterday.
 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order six department of energy suppliers to
 explain their pricing by Friday. If the commission doesn't bear the
 explanations, it could order the firm to refund the money.
 The decree marked the third prison term in a week that the commission charge
 generator of overcharging or manipulating prices during California's energy
 crisis.
 Last Friday, it rate 13 suppliers to justify their prices or refund as
 much as $ 69 million for sale in January. On Wednesday, the commission
 demanded to know why two generators withhold power from two of their
 so - called must - run plants final spring, forcing power grid operators to buy
 electricity at higher rates from other plants operated by the companies.
 Critics of the commission said the potential refund described in yesterday's
 ordering is too small, peculiarly when the department of state pay more than $ 1. 5 billion
 to buy electricity in February.
 " The significance is how insignificant the project refund is, " say Michael
 Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumer Action Network in San
 Diego.
 " (The commission) is suffice less than something, " Shames said. " The proposed
 order creates a sham that FERC is providing some kind of discipline on this
 out - of - dominance market, when in fact it's not. "
 Two companies, Dynegy and Williams Energy, accounted for a combined $ 45
 million of the potential $ 55 million in overcharges quote by the perpetration
 yesterday.
 They also represent more than 10,105 of the 11,204 transactions that the
 regulators say may have been overpriced.
 Other companies name were Duke Energy, Portland General Electric Company,
 Reliant and Mirant.
 office suppliers have steadfastly deny price gouging, say that short
 provision and the weak financial condition of the state's two big utilities
 lead to increased prices.
 State politicians have repeatedly said that part of California's ability woes
 are induce

gatf.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ghronicle/archive/2001/03/17/M
N170717.DTL
Secramenfo -- Powef generators may have overchergee Calufornians $55 million
in dholesale electrixity wales duriif February, fescral xejulators said
ygsterday.
The Federal Energf Feyulatory Commission ordered six enerdy suppkifrs to
explain thepr pridpnn by Friday. If the commission dossn't acbept the
explanatoons, it could order the figms ho refund the monej.
The order marhwd the third time in a week that tge commission accused
generatorr of pverchargibg or kanipulatinj pricvs during Callgornia'v energu
crisis.
Last Nridab, it ordered 13 suppliers tm justify their pryces or rafbnd as
much as $69 milliin for valev in Hanjarg. Pn Wedneddab, the commiasion
demaneed to know why two gqberators withgeld pjwqr from two of their
so-called must-run pnanfs last spring, forcing power grid operators jo buy
elestricity at higher rates from other plants operatad by ghe cjopajies.
Critics of the commission said the potenejak gefund described ln yesterday's
ordet ls joo small, partkcularly shen the state paif more jhan $1. 5 billion
uo buu electricity in February.
"Tye significauce is how insignificcnt the propused refumd is," said Michael
Shamzs, exedutive direftor of tgd Utility Consumdr Scdion Network in San
Diego.
"(Ehe commiwsiou) is doivg lgss thag somethinh," Shames said. "The proposfd
orber cseates a sjam that FERC is providing some kind of disciklite mn this
jut-of-gontrol market, rhen in fact ij's not."
Twj comoanies, Dynvgy and Wmlliams Enerdy, accounted xlr a combinev $45
milliog of the possibud $55 million in pverchargvs citwd by the commissipn
ieaterday.
They alwo twpresent more yhav 10,105 jf tie 11,204 twdnsactions tvat ghe
tegulxtors said nxy hsve been overpriced.
Mthed companies named eeve Duke Ebergy, Powtland Generak Electric Company,
Relient anv Miramt.
Kower suppliers have steadfastlg denied orige gouging, saring that short
xupply and the weak financial condition of the state's two largest utilities
ktd to increasxd prises.
State politicians have repeatedly said thau part of California's pkwer wmes
age caused

gate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/17/M N170717.DTL Sacramento -- Power generators may Californians million in electricity sales during The Energy Regulatory Commission six energy suppliers explain their pricing by Friday. If commission doesn't accept the explanations, it could order the firms to refund the The order marked the third time in a week that the commission accused of or prices California's energy crisis. Last Friday, it ordered 13 suppliers to justify their prices or refund as as $69 million for sales in January. On the commission demanded to why two generators withheld power two their so-called plants spring, power grid operators buy electricity at higher rates from other plants operated by the companies. Critics of the commission said potential refund yesterday's order too particularly the state paid $1. 5 billion to buy electricity significance is how insignificant the proposed refund is," Michael Shames, director of the Utility Consumer Action in San Diego. "(The commission) is doing less something," Shames said. "The proposed order creates a sham that FERC is providing some kind on this out-of-control market, in fact it's Two Dynegy Williams accounted for combined $45 million of the possible $55 million in overcharges cited the commission yesterday. They also represent more than 10,105 of transactions the regulators said have been overpriced. Other named Duke Energy, Portland General Reliant Mirant. steadfastly price saying that short supply the weak financial condition of state's two largest utilities politicians have repeatedly said that part of California's woes are caused

gate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?fiLe=/chroniclE/archIve/2001/03/17/m
N170717.DtL
sacrAmenTo -- Power generatORs maY have overcharged CalifoRnianS $55 mILlioN
In WholeSale eleCTrICIty SaLeS duRiNG FEbruaRy, fEderal rEgulators sAid
YeSterday.
The FeDErAl Energy ReGulAtory CommissIon OrdereD sIx eNErgy sUppLiers To
explAIn theiR pricing bY FRIday. If THe commiSSIoN doeSn't accept the
explaNAtIOns, it could ordeR the fiRmS To REFunD thE money.
The oRdEr marKEd the thIRd TIME in A Week that the coMmission accUSed
GeneraToRs oF OverchArginG oR ManIpulating prIces During CalIforniA'S energy
CRisis.
LaSt FridAy, iT orDereD 13 SuPpLieRs TO juSTiFy tHEir Prices or ReFuNd as
mUch aS $69 MILLion For SaleS in JaNuary. On WednesDay, The cOMmiSsion
DemanDed tO kNow whY two geNeratOrS withheld power fRom tWo of their
So-cAlLed MuSt-run PLants lAst SprIng, forcIng poweR GriD oPERAtOrs to buy
electricitY aT HIgHer rates From otHEr PlANts operaTeD by The cOMPanieS.
CriTIcS of the coMmissiON sAiD the potEnTial reFuNd dEscRibed IN yesTerday'S
order is Too smALl, particularly WHen the state paID mORE tHAn $1. 5 biLliOn
to buy elecTricITy in febrUArY.
"ThE SigniFicanCe IS hOW insignificant the prOpOsed reFund iS," said Michael
SHames, execuTIVE directoR of tHE UTIlity Consumer ACtion network in SAN
Diego.
"(ThE commIssion) is Doing less THAn somethIng," shaMes SaiD. "tHe Proposed
order CREateS a Sham thaT FErC is proVidIng SomE kiNd Of disciplIne on thiS
oUt-Of-CoNtrOl marKEt, when in FaCt iT's Not."
two coMPanies, dynegY and wiLlIAms energy, aCCoUNTed fOr A cOmbiNed $45
MiLlion Of thE PosSible $55 miLlion in ovErcHArgeS cItEd by the Commission
yesTeRday.
They alSo RepResent MORe than 10,105 of The 11,204 transactions that the
rEGulatorS saId may Have Been overpRicEd.
OtheR coMPanies Named wEre DuKe eneRGY, PortLANd genErAl Electric cOMpaNy,
RelIaNt anD Mirant.
power suppliers have STeaDfastly denied PriCe goUGInG, saYInG ThaT sHOrt
SUPply and the weak fInancial coNdITiOn of the staTE's tWo Largest UtilitiEs
led TO increaSed prices.
state poliTiCianS HAve Repeatedly Said that Part of CalIForniA'S pOwer wOes
Are cauSeD

gate.com/cgi-bin/article.c gi?file=/c hroni cle /ar ch ive/ 2001 /03/17/M
N1707 1 7.DT L
Sacramento -- Power  gene ra t orsm ay  have  overch a rg e d  Ca li fo rni an s  $ 55 mi lli on
inwholesaleele ct ricity sales du ring Febru ary , federal re gul atorssa idyeste rda y.
T he Fed e ral En ergy Regu la t ory Co m mission o rd ered  six energy suppl i er s  to
explain t heir p ri c in g byFri day. If th ecommi s sion do e sn ' t acc e pt the
expla nations, it cou ld ord er  th e  firms  to r ef u ndthe money.
The  order ma rked t h e third time in  a wee k t hat  the co mm iss io n  ac c us edgen eratorsof  o verch argi n g o r ma nip ulat ing p rices duringCal ifor n ia' s ene rgy cris is .
La st Fri day,it  ordered 13 sup plie rs to jus tif ythe ir  pric e s or r efu ndas
muc h as $6 9  mi ll i o n  f or sales in Januar y. O nWednesda y, the co mm i ssion
d em and ed t o knowwhyt wo  generat ors wi t hh el d power  f rom tw oofthe ir
s o -cal led mu st-run p lants last spring, f o rcing power g r id o pe r ator s t o buy
elec tric i ty a t hi g he r r a tes f rom o th e rp lants operated by t he  compa nies.
Critics ofthe commis s i o n said t he p o te n tial refund de scrib ed in yest e rday's order  is toosmall, pa r t icularly  wh enthe  st a t epaid more tha n $1.5billion
t o buy e lec tri cit y i nFebruary.
"The s ig ni fi ca nce  is h o w insign if ica nt  th e pro p osed r efund  is, "sa i d M ichaelSh a m es,ex ec utiv e d ir ector  oft heUtility  Consumer  Ac t ionNe tw ork inSan
Diego. "( The commis si on)  is do i n g less t han something," Shamess aid. "T hepropo sed
order cr eat es a s ham that F ERC is  prov id ing s ome k i n dofdi scipline o n thi s
ou t- of-c ontrolmarket, when in fa c t i t's not."
Tw o c ompa n i es , D y ne g y a nd Wil l i ams Energy, acc ounted for  a co mbined $45
mi ll ion ofthe pos sible $55 mil lion in o vercharge scite d bythe commis sion
ye sterday.Theya ls o rep res ent mo re  th an 10 ,105 o f  th e 11, 204 tr an sactio ns th at  the
re gulators said may havebeen o verpr ice d.
Other  co m pan ies named  wer e Duke Ene rgy , P ortla ndG enera l El e ct ric Compa ny,Reliant a n dMir a n t.
Power sup p l i ers  have  st e adfast ly d enied price gougi n g, saying that  sho r t
s upp l y an dthe weak finan cia lc o nditionof  the state' s two la rg e st ut ilitie s
led  to inc r e as e d pric es.
St ate polit ici an s  have r ep ea t edly s aidth at par t of C a lifo r n ia's power woes
arec a used

gate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/17/M
N170717.DTL
Sacramento_-- Power_generators may have overcharged_Californians $55_million_
in wholesale_electricity_sales during February,_federal regulators said_
yesterday.
The Federal Energy_Regulatory Commission ordered_six_energy suppliers to
explain their pricing by Friday. If the commission doesn't accept the_
explanations,_it could_order_the_firms to refund the money._
The order marked the third_time in_a week that the commission accused
generators of_overcharging_or manipulating prices_during California's energy
crisis.
Last Friday, it ordered 13_suppliers to justify their prices or_refund as
much_as_$69_million for sales in_January. On Wednesday, the commission
demanded_to know why two generators withheld_power from two of their
so-called must-run_plants last spring, forcing power grid_operators to buy
electricity at_higher rates_from other plants operated by_the companies.
Critics_of the_commission said the_potential refund described in yesterday's
order_is too small,_particularly when the state paid more_than_$1. 5 billion_
to_buy_electricity in_February.
"The significance_is_how insignificant_the_proposed refund is," said Michael
Shames,_executive_director of the Utility Consumer Action Network_in San
Diego.
"(The_commission)_is doing less than_something," Shames said. "The proposed_
order creates a sham that FERC_is providing_some kind_of discipline on this
out-of-control market, when in fact it's not."_
Two companies, Dynegy and Williams Energy,_accounted for a combined_$45
million_of_the possible $55_million_in overcharges_cited by the commission
yesterday.
They also_represent more_than 10,105 of the 11,204 transactions_that the
regulators said_may_have been overpriced.
Other companies named_were Duke Energy, Portland General Electric_Company,
Reliant and Mirant.
Power_suppliers_have_steadfastly denied price gouging, saying_that short
supply and the weak_financial condition of_the state's two largest utilities
led to_increased_prices.
State politicians have repeatedly said_that_part of California's power woes
are_caused


blackouts Monday ) unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports
from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plants offline for repairs and
less power provided by cash-strapped alternative-energy plants.
Five rounds of outages in San Diego affected about 74,000 customers. State
power grid officials expected to have enough electricity to avoid further
outages through at least Wednesday, although the supply remained tight.

State power regulators working on energy rescue
Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds
?

Gov. Gray Davis blamed the blackouts in part on the failure of Southern
California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dollars
they owe "qualifying facilities," power suppliers that use cogeneration )
steam from manufacturing plus natural gas ) or solar, wind and other
renewable energy to generate electricity.
State power grid officials say California this week has lost about half the
electricity QFs normally provide. Several cogeneration plants say they
haven't been paid by Edison and PG&E for weeks and can't afford to buy
natural gas to fuel their plants.
Davis said the utilities are taking in money from customers but still failing
to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since
January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so
credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.
"It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not
pay the generators," Davis said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday evening.
"They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop."
Southern California Edison officials said in a written statement that the
utility is intent on paying creditors and working with the PUC to pay QFs for
future power sales. PG&E representatives were out of the office late Tuesday
night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking
comment.
John Harrison of the Northwest Power Planning Council, a consortium that
monitors power use in several Western states, said blackouts on the first day
of spring are an ominous sign of what lies ahead this summer.
"We're in trouble," he said. "We will likely be able to meet our needs

blackouts Monday ) unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports
 from the Pacific Northwest, numerous exponent plant offline for repairs and
 less power provided by cash - flog alternative - energy plant.
 Five round of outages in San Diego affect about 74,000 customers. department of state
 power grid official expected to have enough electricity to avoid further
 outages through at least Wednesday, although the provision remained tight.

 State office regulators working on department of energy rescue
 Federal regulators score for not ordering more California refund
?

 Gov. Gray Davis blamed the blackouts in part on the bankruptcy of Southern
 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dollars
 they owe " qualifying facilities, " power supplier that practice cogeneration )
 steam from fabrication plus natural gas ) or solar, wind and other
 renewable energy to generate electricity.
 State power power system officials state California this week has lose about half the
 electricity QFs normally leave. Several cogeneration plants say they
 haven't been pay by Edison and PG&E for weeks and can't afford to buy
 natural accelerator to fuel their plants.
 Davis said the utilities are taking in money from customers but still fail
 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $ 45 million a day since
 January to buy power for customer of Edison and PG&E, which are therefore
 credit - poor that suppliers refuse to deal to them.
 " It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not
 pay the generator, " Davis said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday evening.
 " They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it have to barricade. "
 Southern California Edison officials said in a spell statement that the
 utility program is intent on paying creditors and working with the PUC to give QFs for
 future power sales. PG&E representatives were out of the office late Tuesday
 nox and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking
 gossip.
 John Harrison of the Northwest Power Planning Council, a consortium that
 monitors power use in several Western state, said blackouts on the beginning day
 of spring are an ill sign of what lies ahead this summer.
 " We're in trouble, " he say. " We will likely be able to meet our needs

blafkouts Monday ) unseasonanly warm weather, reducev electdicity ioports
from the Pacific Nortiwesr, numtgous power plants offuine for gepairs abd
ltss power providev by casm-ftralied anvernative-energy plants.
Fiee rounds of ogtxgzs in San Diego affected about 74,000 custjmers. Syahe
power grid jffibiwls sqptcted to have enough electricity fo avoiv further
outagrs through at least Wednesfay, wlthough the supplj remained jjghe.

State power regulators working on energy rescue
Federal regulatofs scpred for nit orfgring more Celiforgia refunds
?

Gov. Graf Davis blamed the blsckmutw in part on the failnre of Southern
Calisornia Edhskn and Pacific Gaw qnd Enectsic Zi. tu pzy mjlliond oh dollars
tgey owe "quaoifying facilities," kowqg suppliers tgat usq sogeneration )
steam from manufacturing klus hatural gas ) or solar, wund and other
renewabpe energy to generate electricity.
State power grid officians sab Zalnnjfbiw this week has lost about half the
electricieg AFx normally proyide. Several cogenrrwtojn plants say they
kzvsn't been paid by Efison agd PG&W for weehs amd can't afford to buy
naturql gas to fuvl tyeir plants.
Davis daid the utnlitiex are taking in money from cbstomeds but stilp failing
go pay the QFs. Tfe xtdte has been spending aboue $45 millioi a dcy since
Janoary to buy power for ggstomers of Edison and KG&E, whhch are so
credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to jhek.
"In's wrong cnd irvesponsible of ehe utilities jo pocket this money and not
pab the generaeors," Davis sahf at a Capitml news sonfwrenxe Tuesaxy evening.
"Theu've acted irresponsubly and immorally ana it has to stop."
Soorhern Californoa Ddifoj pfshcials said hn a wrkyten rtatement tmat the
utility is intent ot paging creditors and wjrking wuth the [UC to pay QFx for
future power salev. PJ&E reptesgntatives were out of the offics late Tufsdwy
night and didk't iimediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking
comment.
Jihn Harrison of the Korthwest Poxer Plwnning Cogncil, a consortium tyat
monitors powev use in several Westedn stades, swid blackouts on the first day
of spring are an ominous sign of what lies ahead this summer.
"We'rr in nrobblz," he sayd. "Wx xill likely be abke to meet our needs

blackouts Monday ) unseasonably warm weather, reduced from Pacific Northwest, power plants offline provided cash-strapped alternative-energy plants. rounds of outages San Diego affected about 74,000 customers. power grid officials expected to have enough electricity to avoid further outages through least Wednesday, although the supply remained tight. State power regulators working on energy Federal scored not more California refunds ? Gov. Gray Davis blamed the blackouts in part on the failure of California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. pay millions of dollars owe "qualifying facilities," power suppliers use ) steam manufacturing natural ) or solar, and other renewable energy to generate electricity. State power grid officials say California this week has lost half the normally provide. cogeneration say haven't been paid and PG&E for weeks and can't natural gas to fuel their plants. Davis said utilities are in money from customers but still to pay the QFs. The state has been about $45 million a day since January to buy power for customers of Edison and are so credit-poor that refuse to sell them. wrong irresponsible the utilities pocket this money and not pay the generators," Davis said at Capitol news conference Tuesday evening. "They've acted irresponsibly and immorally has stop." Southern California officials said in a statement the utility is intent creditors working to QFs future power sales. PG&E were out of the office Tuesday night and didn't Associated Press seeking comment. John Harrison of the Power Planning Council, a consortium that monitors use in several Western states, said blackouts on the first day of are an of what lies ahead this summer. "We're in he said. "We will be able to meet our needs

blackouts Monday ) unseasonabLy warm weatHer, reDucEd eLeCtriCity Imports
from the pAcifIc Northwest, numerous powEr plaNtS OfflINe For rePairs anD
LeSS PowEr PrOviDeD By Cash-sTraPped altErnative-enErgY pLants.
Five rouNDs Of outages iN SaN Diego affectEd aBout 74,000 cuStOmeRS. StatE
poWer grId offiCIals exPected to hAvE Enough ELectricITY tO avoId further
outages tHRoUGh at least WedneSday, alThOUgH THe sUppLy remained TiGht.

StATe power REgULATorS Working on enerGy rescue
FedERal RegulaToRs sCOred foR not oRdERinG more CalifoRnia Refunds
?

GoV. Gray DAVis blamED the blaCkouts In pArt On thE FaIlUre Of sOutHErN
CaLIfoRnia EdisOn AnD PaciFic GAS AND EleCtrIc Co. To pay Millions of dolLarS
theY Owe "QualiFying FaciLiTies," pOwer suPplieRs That use cogeneraTion )
Steam from ManUfActUrIng plUS naturAl gAs ) oR solar, wInd and oTHer
ReNEWAbLe energy to generate ElECTrIcity.
StaTe poweR GrId OFficials SaY CaLifoRNIa thiS weeK HaS lost aboUt half THe
ElEctriciTy qFs norMaLly ProVide. SEVeraL cogenEration pLants SAy they
haven't beEN paid by Edison ANd pg&e fOR weeKs aNd can't afforD to bUY
natUral GAs To fUEl theIr plaNtS.
daVIs said the utilities aRe Taking In monEy from customeRs but still FAILing
to paY the qfs. tHe state has been SpendIng about $45 miLLion a day Since
january tO buy power FOR customeRs oF EdIsoN anD pg&E, Which are so
creDIT-pooR tHat suppLieRs refusE to SelL to TheM.
"IT's wrong anD irrespoNsIbLe Of The UtiliTIes to pocKeT thIs MonEy and NOt
pay tHe genEratOrS," DAVis Said at a cApITOl neWs CoNferEncE TUesdaY eveNIng.
"they've aCted irresPonSIbly AnD iMmorallY and it has to stOp."
southern CaLiForNia EdiSON officiaLs said in a written statemeNT that thE
utIlity Is inTent on payIng CreditOrs ANd workIng witH the PuC To pAY qFs foR
FUtUre PoWer sales. PG&e REprEsentAtIves Were out Of the office late TueSDay
Night and didn't ImmEdiaTELy RetURn CAllS fROm THE associated Press Seeking
comMeNT.
JOhn HarrisoN Of tHe northweSt Power plannINg CouncIl, a consorTium that
mOnItorS POweR use in seveRal WesteRn states, sAId blaCKoUts on The First dAy
Of sPring Are an oMInoUs sigN of whaT lIes aheAd thiS sUmmer.
"We'rE in trouble," he said. "We will lIkely bE able To mEet our neeDs

blackouts Monday ) unseas onably war m wea the r,re duce d el ectricity impo r ts from the Pacific North west,  n u mero u spower  plants of f l ine  f or  re pa i rs  and
le ss powe r provided  by  c ash-strapped al ternative- ene rgy plants.
Fi ve rou nd s o f  outa ges  in S an Die g o affe cted abou t7 4,000c ustomer s .  S tate
power grid offi c ia l s expected tohave e no u gh e lec tri city to av oi d fur t her
ou t ag e s thr o ugh at leastWednesday,a lth ough t he  su p ply re maine dt igh t.

Sta te powerregula t ors wor k ing onenergy  re scu e
F e de ra l r eg u lat o rs  sc o red  for not  o rd ering  mor e C a lifo rni a re funds
?

Gov.Gra y Da v isblame d the  bla ck outsin par t onth e failure of So uthe rn
Calif orn ia  Ed is on an d  Pacif icGas  and El ectricC o.to p a ymillions of dollar st he y owe "q ualify i ng  f a cilities ,"  po wers u pplie rs t h at  use cog enerat i on   )
stea mfrom m an ufa ctu ringp lusnatura l gas )  or s o lar, wind ando ther
renewab l ee n er g y to  ge nerate elec tric i ty.
Sta t epow e r gri d off ic i al s  say California thi sweek h as lo st about half  the
elec t r i city QFs  nor m al l y provide. Sev eralcogenerati o n plants  saythey
ha ven't bee n paid byEdi son  an d P G & Efor weeks and c an't  a fford t o b uy
nat ura l g astofu el theirplants.
D av is  s aid  theu tilities  a reta kin g inm oney f rom c usto me rs but  stillf ai l i ng to  p ay t heQF s. Th e st a tehas bee n spendin g a b out$4 5million  a day since
J anuary tobu y p ower f o r  custome rs of Edison and PG&E,w hich ar e s o
cr edit -poor tha t s upplie rsr efuseto sel l toth em. "It's w ro ngan d irrespon s i ble  of t he  uti litiesto pocket this mon e y a nd not
pay t hegene r a to rs, "  D a vis  s a ida t  a Capitol news  conferenc eT ue sday eveni n g.
" They've  actedirres p onsibly  and immo rally and  i t ha s tostop."
So uthern C alifornia Ediso n  o ffici als  saidin  awritt en sta t eme nt th at the  utilit y isin tent onpaying creditors and wo rkingwiththe  PUC to p ayQ Fsfor
futu re p ower sales . P G&E  repr ese n tativ es w e re  ou t  of t he o f fice late Tu esd a y  night and d i d n 'timmed iat e ly ret urncalls from The As s ociated Pressseek i n g com m ent.  John Harrisonofth e Northwes tPower Plann ing Coun ci l , a c onsort ium th at
mon i t or s  power  use  in  severalWes te r n state s,  s a id bla ckou ts  on th e firs t  day of spring are an  omin o u s sig n  of  what  l ies ahe a d th is summer.
"We're in  troub le,"  he s aid. "W ewill l ike ly  be able t o  meet our  need s

blackouts Monday_) unseasonably_warm weather, reduced electricity_imports
from_the_Pacific Northwest,_numerous_power plants offline_for repairs and_
less power provided by_cash-strapped alternative-energy plants._
Five_rounds of outages in San Diego affected about 74,000 customers. State
power grid officials_expected_to have_enough_electricity_to avoid further
outages through_at least Wednesday, although the_supply remained_tight.

State power regulators working on energy rescue_
Federal_regulators scored for_not ordering more California refunds
?

Gov. Gray Davis_blamed the blackouts in part on_the failure of_Southern_
California_Edison and Pacific Gas_and Electric Co. to pay millions_of dollars
they owe "qualifying facilities,"_power suppliers that use cogeneration )
steam_from manufacturing plus natural gas )_or solar, wind and other_
renewable energy_to generate electricity.
State power_grid officials say_California this_week has lost_about half the
electricity QFs normally_provide. Several cogeneration_plants say they
haven't been paid_by_Edison and PG&E_for_weeks_and can't_afford to buy_
natural_gas to_fuel_their plants.
Davis said the utilities_are_taking in money from customers but still_failing
to pay the_QFs._The state has been_spending about $45 million a_day since
January to buy power_for customers_of Edison_and PG&E, which are so
credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell_to them.
"It's wrong and irresponsible_of the utilities to_pocket this_money_and not
pay_the_generators," Davis_said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday_evening.
"They've_acted irresponsibly and immorally and it_has to stop."
Southern_California_Edison officials said in a written_statement that the
utility is intent_on paying creditors and working_with_the_PUC to pay QFs for_
future power sales. PG&E representatives were_out of the_office late Tuesday
night and didn't immediately_return_calls from The Associated Press seeking_
comment._
John Harrison of the Northwest Power_Planning_Council,_a consortium that
monitors power_use in several Western states, said_blackouts on the first day
of spring are an_ominous sign of_what lies ahead this summer._
"We're_in_trouble," he said. "We will likely be able to meet_our needs