Frank, After looking the packet over in detail, I found the questions to be a great tool, especially the ones aimed at the 'soft skills'. Previously when interviewing people I always struggled for a way to ask these type of questions legally and ethically. I think the packet also will aid in my organization and will keep the interview moving at an efficient pace. Thanks,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Focused Interview Feedback
With the recent reorganizations of several commercial groups, it has become necessary to change our staff meetings. A "Policy Committee" of the Energy Legal Group has been established and will meet every other Monday at 11:00 am (CDT) in EB3321, starting on August 13, 2001. On the alternate Mondays, the Office of the General Counsel meeting with be held at 11:00 am (CDT) in EB3321. The meetings will be limited to one hour. Initially, the Policy Committee and the Office of General Counsel will include the individuals listed below. If you have any questions, please call me at 3-6544. Policy Committee Office of the General Counsel Alan Aronowitz Sami Arap Mark Evans Alan Aronowitz Mark Haedicke Justin Boyd Bruce Lundstrom Mary Nell Browning Julia Murray Deborah Culver John Novak Mark Evans Lance Schuler Barbara Gray Vicki Sharp Jeff Hodge Mark Taylor James Keller Peter Keohane Bruce Lundstrom Michelle Maynard Travis McCullough Julia Murray John Novak Dan Rogers Elizabeth Sager Richard Sanders Lance Schuler Vicki Sharp Mike D. Smith Mark Taylor Sheila Tweed Marcus Von Bock und Polach
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Staff Meetings for the Energy Legal Group
Hi Carlos, I'm back in DC, at the Willard, so I'm thinking of you. We (the commercial leads and I) will be in Richmond tomorrow for negotiations, then back tomorrow night at the Willard. I hope things are ok for you. I know it is probably stressful. Hang in there. Kay
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Hello from the Willard
The policy spelled out in Order No. 637 (and affirmed on rehearing in Order No. 637-A) for pricing under ROFR at the expiration of a lower-rate service agreement (where rates are "vintaged"). In both Order No 637 and Order No. 637-A the Commission notes that this policy is consistent with the Certificate Policy Statement issued in 1999. Order No. 637 states as follows: [A] shipper exercising its ROFR could be required to match a bid up to a maximum rate higher than the historic maximum rate applicable to its capacity in certain limited circumstances: when a pipeline expansion has been completed and an incremental rate exists on the system; the pipeline is fully subscribed; and there is a competing bid above the maximum pre-expansion rate applicable to existing shippers. * * * As the Commission explains in the Certificate Policy Statement, to adjust the maximum rate applicable to shippers exercising their ROFR in these circumstances, the pipeline would have to establish a mechanism for reallocating costs between the historic and incremental rates so all rates remain within the pipeline's cost-of-service. The mechanism can be established either through a general section 4 rate case or through the filing of pro forma tariff sheets which would provide the Commission and the parties with an opportunity to review the proposal prior to implementation. Order No. 637 references one instance where a pipeline had filed such a mechanism as follows: Cf. Viking Gas Transmission Company, 89 FERC Para. 61,204 (1999) (rejecting tariff filing to raise matching rates under a ROFR where, among other things, the filing did not readjust existing and expansion rates. Jan and I are doing a search right now to determine where there have been any other filings. I'll let you know what we find. Let me know if you have any follow-up questions.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Order 637 ROFR Pricing Policy