postbot/aeslc_kw huggingface dataset:
Subject: PG&E utility gives Calpine debt priority status.

USA: UPDATE 1-PG&E utility gives Calpine debt priority status.
07/06/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001.
(changes 1st paragraph, adds details, company statement)  SAN JOSE, Calif., July 6 (Reuters) - Independent power generator Calpine  Corp. said on Friday that its contracts with Pacific Gas and Electric Co.  will be altered, ensuring that Calpine will continue to supply power to the  bankrupt California utility and that it will get paid more than $250 million  for power already sold.
Calpine stocks rose more than 14 percent, or more than $5, to $43 after the  announcement.
As part of the contract modification, the $267 million, with interest, that  the utility, a unit of PG&E Corp , owes Calpine in past due receivables under  the contracts, will be elevated to "administrative priority status," a claim  which is paid before any other general unsecured creditors.
Calpine will get the money, in a lump sum, as soon as PG&E has a confirmed  reorganization plan, which can take as long as four to six months from now,  Calpine said.
The move is also a step in the process of untangling California's energy  crisis, which stemmed from a flawed deregulation plan that has hit the state  with a series of rolling blackouts.
Under the agreement, Calpine will continue to receive its contractual  capacity payments, but it has also set up a fixed rate contract for the next  five years of about 5.37 cents per kilowatt-hour.
The contracts are known as qualifying facility contracts because Calpine's  power plants are qualifying facilities.
These types of facilities represent  more than 20 percent of the state's power supply and sell power generated  from renewable energy sources to the regulated utilities.
"Calpine is the first power company to modify its QF contract with PG&E to  ensure that Northern California consumers will continue to benefit from these  affordable and reliable energy resources," Calpine senior vice president  James Macias said in a statement.
Subject: You Must Come

The weekend of Dec 15, 16, 17.
Stinson Beach.
Glorious place on the beach.
Professional blue grass band.
Catered food.
Fun people (even Tom, Karen,  David, Starr and Nina).
For Prentice's 30th birthday.
And it will just  suck if you're not there.
Huge hugs, very wet kisses.
Subject: Weekend efforts to translate core/noncore proposal into legislative  language

Below is an update from the weekend's activities.
The group negotiating the core/noncore proposal met over the weekend to  attempt to put the proposal into legislative language/format.
The product produced thus far is generally sloppy and ill-drafted and the  individual facilitating the group is working tonite to integrate the comments  provided and discussions that took place today.
He will  distribute a new  draft by noon tomorrow (PDT).
The plan as it currently stands is to deliver a product to Hertzberg by COB  tomorrow (Monday).
As expected, some in the group are attempting to "recontract" certain  portions of the original deal, but those attempts are generally at the margin.
The DWR contracts remain a key impediment to any deal.
Senator Burton has still not definitively committed to a conference committee  to produce a bill to deliver to Davis.
In addition, the legislation to create a dedicated rate component to service  the bonds to repay the state budget for power purchased by DWR (and de-link  the bonds from the DWR contracts) may be on a slower track than folks thought  initially.
Will have more information tomorrow on where Burton and the bond legislation  stand.
Best,
Subject: California Update 07.09.01

The Bond Legislation The Democrats in the Assembly and Sentate have agreed to language to create a  Dedicated Rate Component to repay the budget and de-link the bonds from the  DWR contracts.
But the Republicans have still not agreed to go along.
The bill would require a 2/3's vote to keep the bond issuance on schedule, so  Republican votes are necessary.
The Republicans are trying to meet tonite or tomorrow to determine whether to  go along.
The Conference Committee Senator Burton does not like the idea of a conference committee and at this  point prefers to use the existing committee structure to hear the  core/noncore proposal.
Using the existing committee structure could take longer to produce a bill  than using the conference committee structure, but how much longer is  uncertain.
No sense yet of when hearings on the core/noncore proposal---in conference
Subject: Energy Issues

Please see the following articles:  Sac Bee, Tues, 5/10: No deal in energy refund talks  Sac Bee, Tues, 5/10: Third power plant opens: But the Los Medanos=20 facility isn't pouring out electricity yet  Sac Bee, Tues, 5/10: State reveals high-priced power deals  Sac Bee, Tues, 5/10: Government finds ways to conserve: The Santa Rita=20 Jail goes solar as agencies get creative to cut costs  SD Union, Tues, 5/10: Energy talks reach no settlement; state threatens sui= t  SD Union, Tues, 5/10: Refunds in jeopardy as talks fail  SD Union, Tues, 5/10: State's massive outlays detailed  SD Union, Tues, 5/10: State releases early spot market energy purchases  LA Times, Mon, 5/9: FERC Judge Says State Owed No More Than $1 Billion  LA Times, Tues, 5/10: Electricity Cost Data Spread the Blame  LA Times, Tues, 5/10: Duke Energy Asked to Allow Release of Data  LA Times, Mon, 5/9: Concern Over Price of Long-Term Power Pacts Grows  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: State's refund demand rejected=20 Judge ends rebate talks, rebukes $9 billion claim=20  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: Davis opens another new power plant=20 Pittsburg facility will generate 555 megawatts  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: California rejects B.C.
Hydro $125 million settlement  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: Davis' criticism of Texas misdirected, report finds  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: Developments in California's energy crisis  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: Energy talks reach no settlement; state threatens sui= t  SF Chron, Tues, 5/10: Toxic fumes not linked to blackouts=20 Backup power OK in facilities, report says  Mercury News, Tues, 5/10: Power suppliers, state fail to agree on refund to= tal  Mercury News, Tues, 5/10: Power purchase bills exceed $7.5 billion Biggest suppliers are not from Texas  OC Register, Tues, 5/10: Refund outlook dims  OC Register, Tues, 5/10: State reveals details of power purchases  OC Register, Tues, 5/10: Ghost of Bob Citron roaming halls of capital Gray Davis is following footsteps of former O.C.
treasurer into fiscal=20 chaos      (Commentary)  Individual.com (PRnewswire), Tues, 5/10: Calpine's Los Medanos Energy Cente= r=20 Adds Needed Generation to California Second New Major Base Load Generator for=20 California=20  NY Times, Tues, 5/10: California and Generators Still Split After 2-Week Ta= lks  Wash. Post, Tues, 5/10: Energy Refund Talks Fail In Calif.; Federal Agency'= s=20 Judge To Propose Settlement  WSJ, Tues, 5/10: California and Energy Companies Miss Deadline
Subject: From Today's Electricity Daily

FYI.
In bizarre times, help can sometimes come from bizarre places.
Granted,  we're likely to disagree strongly with Hogan's continued obsession with  Poolco, but the discussion in his paper regarding market power may be  helpful---I've read the Joskow paper, but haven't yet had a chance to review
Subject: Dunne Letter

Folks.
I'm working on it, but it's going to require quite a bit of work.
Please chk your emails later this evening for the next draft.
I'll page  folks--those with pagers, that is--to notify when I've emailed it.
Scott,
Subject: Next Draft of Letter to Dunn

Greetings;  I've tried to accommodate everyone's comments, but there's still a hole or  two.
In addition, seems that the letter would benefit from a bit more  editing to make it shorter.
Richard, note that I've left a place holder in  the opening paragraph to fill in a summary of our arguments and the  conditions under which we'd be willing to produce certain documents.
Best,
Subject: Peace Letters to FERC

need watkiss' phone #.
peace's letters to FERC urging FERC to approve CA's  (dumb) market structure should be on file there.
I'm checking w/smutney.
best,jeff
Subject: Davis Accuses Jones of "Witchhunt"

Please note Maviglio's comments in response to Sec of State Bill Jones' claim  that Davis' consultants have violated ethics laws by not filing conflict of  interest reports with the state while working for Davis.
Maviglio sez:  Jones is "on a witch hunt on something outside his jurisdiction."
Mark, quit feeding PR lines to Davis' people.
Best,
Subject: Conversation with Dave Parquet re: siting bill

Talked to Dave.
In a nut shell, here are the problem areas in the bill as he  sees it.
It was a very brief conversation, but I think I've captured the key  points: Based on an expectation that the "expedited siting" bill would help site  plants, Dave's group had six plants on the drawing board.
The 5 ppm requirement kills 4 of the 6, i.e., the 4 can't meet the 5 ppm  requirement.
The requirement that the plants would either be 1) shut down after 3 years or  2) replaced with a combined-cycle plant kills the other 2 because a) shutting  down the plants in 3 years kills the economics, and b) the sites for the two  LM-6000s can't accomodate combined cylces (i.e., Dave couldn't get siting).
In addition,the generator would be required to sign an exclusive with the ISO  (which the EOB would have to approve), which takes away the optionality of  going to the market, thus killing the economics.
On the labor side, it's complicated, but in essence, by requiring that "...it  be shown that the applicant has a contract with a general contractor and has  contracted for an adequate supply of skilled labor to construct, operate, and  maintain the plant,"  it forces Dave to negotiate a labor deal before he knows what the project is  (i.e, before the project has been approved), and, it effectively prevents Enron from having the option to use internal  resources (this issue is very specific to Enron; I can explain more if folks  prefer).
In short, bullets 1-3 would seem to affect both Enron and the market, while  the last bullet is, according to Dave, very Enron specific.
Point 2 in  bullet 4, according to Dave is sensitive and should not be made public.
If any questions, let me know.
Bruno has emailed the price cap and the  "general-funds-to-help-finance-the-cap" bills, and faxed the siting bill.
Best,
Subject: California Assembly Releases "Modified MOU" for Edison

Please forward to others who need this information.
As you know, Enron's been involved with a group of business customers, small  customers, labor and enviros trying to hammer out a core/noncore proposal  that would act as a key modification to Edison's MOU with the Governor.
Today, the Assembly leadership released a bill (AB 82XX) that modifies the  MOU but does not follow the core/noncore proposal negotiated by the group.
The bill just came out, is about 80 pages long, and thorough analysis has not  yet been completed.
The URL for the bill is attached.
Based on a meeting  attended this morning in Sacramento,the key features of the bill( which is  attached) are:  Direct Access suspended until 1.1.2003 (suspension presumably effective on  the effective date of the bill) Transmission sale at 2X book.
Approximately 90% (or greater) of Edison's undercollection absorbed by  customers 20KW and above.
Create a Trust to address the money owed to the generators and offer the  generators 70 cents on the dollar (but does not do away with the suits,  investigations, etc.)
The bill is completely silent regarding who will pay for the DWR contracts  and what the payment structure will look like.
Reaction and Timetable Very chaotic, with considerable uncertainty about where (if anywhere) the  bill will go, leaving many to believe that bankruptcy remains a strong  possibility.
Business customers (and of course Enron) are strongly opposed Republicans are strongly opposed Labor has big problems with the Tx sale unless they get assurances that TX  labor jobs are guaranteed, which is not yet included in the bill We are working with business to remove the Direct Access suspension We are also working on the Senate side to attempt to get the Senate to  include Direct Access in their version of the modified MOU, but the Senate  has been more hostile than the Assembly to Direct Access.
Senate Democrats still intend to run a bill that delinks payment of the bonds  to repay General Fund for power already purchased from the DWR contracts.
AB82XX does not address this issue.
Senate Democrats also intend to craft their own version of a "modified MOU."
Word is that the Senate will release their bond language and their "modified"  MOU this weekend or early next week.
The Assembly will hold an "informational" hearing on the bill tomorrow  (Saturday) to get members up to speed The Assembly will have a committee hearing and vote on the bill on Monday,  with the intent of sending the bill to the full Assembly for a vote on  Tuesday.
The Legsilature is supposed to have a month-long recess beginning Friday,  July 20th, which requires that both the budget and the energy issue get  resolved by then, or suspend the recess and continue working
Subject: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions

Barry, et al:  FYI.
Some initial info I got from our outside council regarding utility  authority to engage in financial risk management tools.
More info to follow  as we get it.
If you have quesitons, comments, or suggestions for additional  research needed, just holler.
Please forward to others who might need it.
Best,
Subject: Update on California Legislation---Afternoon of 07.16.01

Here's the latest that we have on the legislation ("82XX") released on Friday.
The Assembly Energy Committee will hold an "informational" hearing on 82XX at  1:30 PM PDT today.
"Informational" means that there won't be a vote today.
Attended a meeting this morning with the business groups with Assemblyman  Dutra (self-proclaimed pro-biz Democrat, who's an "author"  of 82XX),  Hertzberg's chief staffer, and Hertzberg's outside legal consultant.
The DWR contracts continue to be the roadblock to a rational solution.
Dutra is unhappy with the process thus far----claimed he wasn't familiar with
Subject: Legal Representation for Steve Harris

Drew/Steve/Tony:  I've talked to Dan and he's available to represent Steve during his testimony  on Wednesday.
Few things:  Dan's an excellent regulatory lawyer.
Dan worked for many years at SoCalGas before going into private practice.
Drew, I'll leave to you and Dan to work out the details of any contract for  Dan's services.
Dan will need immediately: A copy of Steve's testimony.
A copy of the PUC Rulemaking, etc.
calling for testimony.
Any information on the list of parties who have indicated that they will  cross Steve and for how long, and any testimony filed by those parties.
In addition, I would recommend strongly that Dan and Steve (at a minimum) get  on the phone and discuss Steve's testimony tomorrow, and plan to meet prior  to the hearing on Wednesday.
If you'd like me to participate in a call  tomorrow, just let me know.
If there's anything else I can do, just let me know.
Best,
Subject: SCE SOx Auction

man, do i OWE you a phone call.
please don't hold it against me.
sort of  well, you know, a little nuts right now.
but i will reconnect.
i promise.
Subject: California Update--0717.01

What people know:  Hertzberg (et al's) bill (82XX)was heard in an "informational" hearing today  and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee.
It will be heard again  tomorrow (perhaps beginning at 10 AM) , at which time parties will have a  chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments.
Most, including us, oppose  unless significantly amended.
The Wright (D) -Richman (R) bill (83XX)was heard in an "informational"
Subject: Update to California Update 07.18.01

The wierdness continues.....
In the Senate: After Burton's "proclamation" yesterday afternoon that Senate bill 78XX was  "all Edison was getting, period," the bill was voted down in committee and  never made it to the full Senate for a vote.
The bill will be "reconsidered" (i.e., voted on again) today in the same  committee.
In the Assembly: Hertzberg's bill (82XX) got voted down initially, until Rod Wright switched  his vote and let it get out.
82 XX then went to the appropriations committee, where it was voted out, and  now it's scheduled for a floor vote this morning.
83XX, the bipartisan bill led by Wright (D) and Richman (R), was also voted  out of committee and will go to appropriations today.
Will report back later this AM with any additional information.
Best,
Subject: Dunn

Anything can happen, but Hedy just talked to the Executive Offficer of the  Senate Rules committee who told her that it is very unlikely that the full  Senate would vote on any contempt report before the Senate leaves for recess;  that is, they likely wouldn't vote on anything until they return in August.
Other info from the conversation: With respect to fines, sanctions, etc., he said that "they're making it up as  they go."
Any vote on fines, etc.
would only a require a simple majority to pass.
Subject: DA Language

John:  Here are two alternatives to the language in AB1X.
The language does two things:  1) ensures that DA customers' costs are shifted to utility customers.
2) ensures that DA customers' don't unfairly escape any costs (e.g., bond  payments, etc.)
We're assuming that you'll shop these with Lenny and we'll work the Reps on  SB 18?
Lemme know.
Best,
Subject: Senate Debating Unfairness of Singling Out Private-sector Sellers  for Investigation

The Republicans are currently on the Senate floor arguing (noisily,  repeatedly and passionately) that California (and the Senate in particular)  is being hypocritical and intellectually dishonest in attacking and  investigating private companies and ignoring munis.
One Senator specifically identified prices charged by LADWP and SMUD and  compared those prices to Enron's (1/3 to 1/2 less than LADWP and SMUD  charged).
Best,
Subject: State Senate OKs bailing out Edison from bankruptcy

FYI.
Fairly accurate account of the activities in California.
Assembly  released new version of Hertzberg's bill late last night.
Another update to  follow shortly.
Best,
Subject: California Update 07.22.01

Summary of the activities since Friday:  Overall, it's 50-50 or better that the Legislature will finish up the budget  and recess until August 20th, without having passed some form of an "Edison  MOU."
Will have a better view of the chances of getting an MOU agreed to and  passed through both houses by COB Monday.
In the Senate: The "Edison MOU": As previously reported, on Friday, SB 78---the Senate's version of the Edison
Subject: vitally urgent--please read

You didn't tell me that you were going to France to have a secret rendez-vous  with Evie Kahl.
Gotchya!
Welcome back.
It's been a fucking zoo.
Best,
Subject: FINAL

FYI.
This was a significant event while you were gone.
I got tasked with  putting together a letter to Dunn's committee from Steve.
Here's the final.
You should look it over so you know what's out there.
Would be interesting  to contrast with our recent FERC filing.
Best,
Subject: Dan Walters: Blame game over California's energy crisis will  continue for years

Dan Walters: Blame game over California's energy crisis will continue for  years (Published July 24, 2001)  The wrestling match between politicians and Enron Corp. moved into a more  intense arena over the weekend when a state Senate investigating committee  sought contempt penalties because the huge energy company has refused to turn  over internal documents.
Although Houston-based Enron owns no major power plants in California, it has  adopted the toughest stance of all energy companies against the multiple  investigations of why wholesale energy prices spiked so high.
And it has  become, in turn, a whipping boy for California politicians.
At one point last spring, state Attorney General Bill Lockyer said he wanted  criminal charges against Enron and its chairman, Kenneth Lay.
"I would love  to personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a  tattooed dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey,' " Lockyer said.
With  less colorful language, Gov.
Gray Davis has often castigated Texas-based  companies as price gougers -- even though Texas firms have been fairly minor
Subject: Rumor That The Legislature May Reconvene

Bizarre as it sounds, we've now heard that they are calling the Assembly  members back.
So it appears that the Assembly leadership will at least make  a run at this.
We are getting more information and mobilizing industry.
Some key considerations:  The Governor is putting immense pressure on the Legislature to get something  done.
The Legislature is fearful of getting blamed by the Governor for having "done  nothing."
Becauase the Assembly has thus far "done nothing," the only thing it has in  front of it is 78.
The Assembly could not agree to the Speaker's bill because it felt the bill  was too far to the left; but 78 is even more one-sided.
So there's a  reasonable likelihood that 78 would have to be amended considerably in order  to get the support necessary to get voted out.
Once voted out of the Assembly, it would have to go back to the Senate, where  the Senate would have to approve it.
Again, the Senate has adjourned, so Burton would have to round them up and  call them back for a vote, and there's no indication at this time that  Burton's inclined to come back.
In addition, Burton has said that he's not interested in making any changes  to 78, that "it's 78 or nothing."
Consequently, for the Sentate (i.e.,  Burton) to vote it out, it would first have to agree to the Assembly's  amendments.
Thus far, the Assembly and the Senate have not seen eye to eye  on the issues.
All that said, this Legislature is far from rational, and nothing can be  counted out.
We're therefore operating under the assumption that 78 could  move.
Will report back as information becomes available.
Best,
Subject: California Update 7/25/01----Meeting w/Assembly on Its Latest  Version of Edison MOU

Adding to Kristin's update, here's the summary of a meeting that just occured  with Assembly leadership staff and industry on the Assembly's latest version  of an "Edison MOU":  The Speaker's staffer said that if he had to bet at this time, he would bet  that the Assembly would not convene on Friday.
He also said that, if it doesn't happen on Friday, nothing will happen until  they get back from recess on the 20th of August.
The Assembly will let folks know by tonight or first thing tomorrow whether  they intend to move forward with a vote on Friday or recess.
From the most recent proposal released today by the Assembly leadership, it  appears that the centrist Democrats are prevailing.
The proposal: Retains Direct Access (though they said that they are continuing to be  pressured by the Treasurer, who wants DA suspended due to the bond issuance) Places 80% of Edison's past debt with large customers (leaving 20% with small  customers, which business customers or strenuously opposing).
Eliminates all references to any purchase, or option to purchase, Edison's  transmission.
(They said there simply ain't the votes to buy, or consider  buying, Edison's transmission in the Assembly) Maintains the Senate provision, which would pay the banks, pay the QFs, but  place with Edison the risk of figuring out how to pay the $1billion owed to  suppliers.
(Even the munis are begining to complain about those provisions.)
Creates a tradeable, renewable portfolio standard (conceptually similar to  the one created in Texas).
The new bill is created by 1) amending SB78 and 2) gutting a different bill  passed from the Senate to the Assembly, SB39, and replacing it with the new  version of 82XX.
The two would go together to create the Assembly's newest  proposal.
If this bill gets voted out of the Assembly, it will likely have a difficult  time getting the votes necessary to pass in the Senate, since the Senate has  considered and rejected several provisions currently included in the Assembly  version.
Will report back on whether the Assembly's going forward or adjourning for  recess as soon as we hear.
Best,