QUESTION: Please send the current DRAFT to the User's Guide to 1999 ISDA Credit Derivatives Definitions to my attention. I understand that these can be sent to reply mail. You can reach me by phone at 713/853-5620 if you have any problems. Thanks. Sara Shackleton [Enron North America Corp.]
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: UG315
Transwestern held its Transport Options Workshop on August 31. Commercial and regulatory representatives of BP-Amoco, Burlington, Conoco, Coral, Dynegy, Phillips and Reliant attended. After a brief overview of the proposed filing, TW opened the floor for questions and comments. Here is a summary of the comments. Marketing affiliate concerns. BP's regulatory representative expressed concern that TW's marketing affiliates would be able to use options to game the system. In BP's example, since TW and ENA are both Enron companies, ENA could purchase an "out of the money" call option essentially cost free, since its affiliate (TW) would have the ability to buy the option back. Proceeds from ENA's ability to then "move the market" through the establishment of the long basis position would go directly to Enron's bottom line. BP suggested that TW's marketing affiliates be banned from purchasing options, or that the marketing affiliate be required to credit 100% of the option proceeds to other shippers. Although BP admits that Transwestern's prior dealings with ENA have not been suspect, BP fears that TW's filing will set a precedent for other pipelines to offer a similar service. Since TW will be the first pipeline to offer such services, BP wants TW's program to be as restricted as possible. Dynegy echoed BP's concern regarding possible affiliate abuse, but rather than shelve the program entirely, Dynegy reiterated an earlier suggestion that Transwestern be required to credit back the difference between the option fee paid by an affiliate and the next highest bidder, if the affiliate's bid exceeds the next highest by a certain percentage. TW's response was that while actual abuse of an options program by a marketing affiliate may be a legitimate concern, owing to its unassailable record in this area, TW should be entitled to a presumption that it has complied and will continue to comply with Commission policy covering the sale of capacity to marketing affiliates, and was not inclined to voluntarily include any limitations on the options program. If BP and others have serious concerns regarding the Commission's overall policy on marketing affiliates, those issues should be raised in a separate proceeding that applies to all interstate pipelines. Right of first refusal. Burlington asked whether options would replace the right of first refusal. TW's response was that ROFR will still be available pursuant to the terms and conditions of our tariff. Negotiated rate. BP's representative claimed that option contracts will constitute a negotiated rate and that each deal will need to be filed as such. TW did not respond to this or discuss it further. However, TW's position at this point is that since the option fee is part of the transportation rate, transportation deals that include the option amendment will only be considered negotiated rate deals if the total rate including the option fee exceeds the maximum transport rate. Hoarding capacity. Using the recent large block sale of capacity on El Paso as an example, several customers expressed concern that the options program would make it easier for a shipper to hoard capacity. It was not clear why some of the workshop participants thought that the sale of options would create more opportunity for hoarding capacity than already exists. Perhaps because the option fee is a lesser cost than the transport rate for the underlying capacity, their perception was that options would simply make hoarding cheaper and easier. TW acknowledged that the potential for withholding capacity from the market is one reason for FERC's current policy against reserving capacity for shippers. Although TW did not commit to placing any limits on the either the quantity of capacity or options for capacity that any one shipper may own, it is possible that FERC may require TW to do so in a final order. Our plan is to meet with PG&E and SoCalGas in California the week of September 11 to go over details of the program, and to finalize the FERC filing by mid-September.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: TW Options update
Tracy, Please find attached the Plan presentation for Adam's review with Stan scheduled for Thurdsday. Please let me know if you have any concerns. Thank you.
Answer: EREC 2002 Plan Presentation
Here is an email: The United Way kickoff is here! The "Millionaire Game for Millions" will be played after the Employee Meeting this Wed. at the Hyatt. A FREE lunch will be provided in the park after the game. It will be a casual day and wear green to support the CORP. game show participants. I encourage you to click on the United Way web site to make a contribution. Everyone that makes a contribution by COB Friday will be eligible for the Governmental Affairs raffle for BIG PRIZES!! While I encourage you to give generously, any amount is certainly helpful. A weekly contribution of: $1 provides 8 families with a week's work of food $2 helps teach 5 adults to read, breaking the cycle of illiteracy $5 provides 60 seniors with a nutritious meal and social interaction at a senior center For example, last year UW in the Houston Gulf Coast area fed more than 1,000,000 seniors; helped 42,000 children attend quality childcare; and provided job training to 45,000 people. Through United Way's volunteer allocation committees, projects are funded and reviewed to ensure accountability. It is an effective way to give back to our community. Thanks for your support.
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: UNITED WAY
Q: Jeff - I'm told by our core procurement people that Enron has refused to enter into any term gas contracts for this winter because of problems they have with us on the electric side. Personally, that makes no sense to me. We have the PUC's security order that guarantees payment and Judge Montali has made it clear that he will approve the payment on all gas contracts. It seems to me that if this is true, Enron is really screwing itself - which is no the way Enron typically does business. Can you check with your people ? We are now in the process of finalizing our needs for the winter.
Propose a subject line
A: Enron Sales to Core Procurement
Here is an email: IMPORTANT NOTICE - Implementation of OASIS Reports December 19, 2001 ISO Market Participants: The November 7th and November 20th FERC decisions require additional information to be provided to Market Participants through OASIS. The following is the current implementation schedule: OASIS CERS Transition Tab Location New Report Name Effective Date Item Number* System Load System Loads by IOU 12/01/01 B.1.c, B.2 Ex-Post Real-Time Imbalance Energy Price Summary 12/13/01 B.1.d, B.1.e, B.1.f Transmission Branch Group Congestion Market Summary 1998 B.1.g Ancillary Service Ancillary Service Summary Report 12/12/01 B.1.h Forecast Forecasted Imbalance Energy Requirements 12/12/01 B.3 To Be Determined Muni's Hour Ahead Load Schedules To Be Determined** B.1.a To Be Determined Hour Direct Access Load To Be Determined** B.1.b * CERS Transition Item Number refers to information provided in the CAISO Market Notice "Changes to Provision of Data to CERS" dated November 30, 2001 ** Implementation Schedule is expected to be released in the next week. Specific report details and data definitions are provided in the OASIS Glossary of Terms, accessible from the OASIS Home Page. Client Relations Communications.0921 CRCommunications@caiso.com
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A:
Subject: CAISO Notice - Implementation of OASIS Reports