IN: This is an email
Two contract's ROFR notification expired this week (11/30/2000). These contracts will terminate next year 11/30/2001. Burlington with 15000 Ignacio to Blanco and PG&E with 20000 Blanco to EOT. Eprime signed a 50000/day park and ride agreement effective 12/01/2000. Current posted rates are at max of .3883. Invoices are going out next week. Included is the Burlington credit of $83000 in prior period adjustments.

What is the subject?

OUT: Bullets 12/01/2000
QUESTION: The letter looks good. A couple of comments for your consideration: On page three we describe the change to the definition of Public Utility and then argue that we don't fit into it. Would it be worth explaining why that makes sense? Specifically, the New Jersey restructuring law, like most efforts of its kind in other markets, is designed to separate the competitive from monopoly elements of the power (and gas) businesses. Economic regulation would then be restricted to the remaining monopoly elements of the business (eg distribution). The competitive market can not be solely relied upon to "regulate" the behavior of monopoly asset owners, such as distribution utilities. Therefore, regulators continue to be called upon to set pricing and other terms of service. What those regulators decide matters a great deal to those monopoly utilities and it consequently makes sense for lawmakers to be concerned about attempts by such entities to use campaign contributions to tacitly influence decision makers. The same public policies simply do not apply to that portion of the market which is competitive. The generation and sales business has a competitive structure (i.e. relatively low barriers to entry, multiple competitors etc.). These components of the power and gas business can be "regulated" by the market with respect to rates and terms of service. They do not require economic regulation any more than grocery stores, department stores, appliance sellers or other "retailers" (who presumably are not prohibited from making contributions. Competition and markets discipline behavior and establish competitive prices and terms of service. Because regulators don't set the prices and terms of service for such sellers, there is no reason to be concerned about campaign contribuitions from such organizations. Indeed, the legislation, and the legislative history, clearly conform to this underlying policy rationale. As a former practicing lawyer, I certainly understand the value of pleading in the alternative. But, I question how certain of our arguments woud be perceived by the public if they ever came to light (which these documents have a habit of doing).. . I can just see the press seizing on Enron's claim of "ignorance or mistake" or the fact that we pled for the favorable exercise of "prosecutorial discretion". I suggest that we add whatever we feel is necessary to the very solid looking intent argument, not make specific reference to "ignorance or mistake", and not plead for the favorable esxercise of PD. If we feel we need to write about this last item, perhaps we could suggest that it would be a waste of the public's resources to pursue a claim under such circumstances.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: AG letter - privileged and confidential: request for legal advice.
HERE IS A FINAL WORD ABOUT BLOOMBERG TRADES - WHEN YOU EXECUTE A TRADE ON BLOOMBERG, YOU MUST IDENTIFY "BLOOMBERG" AS THE BROKER IN ENPOWER. IF YOU FIND THIS MESSAGE UNCLEAR, MORALLY OPPOSING, OR IF YOU'D LIKE A LENGTHIER EXPLANATION OF WHY YOU HAVE TO DO THIS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY. HERE'S WHAT YOUR BLOOMBERG DEALS SHOULD LOOK LIKE:
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: URGENT - PLEASE READ...REALLY
With high hopes that this is the FINAL final version, I'm attaching what I believe to be the execution copy. Some things have been cleaned up, and Brownsville has been added to paragraph 5. I'm going to start collecting signatures. Thanks,
Answer: THE agreement
Here is an email: 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
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: California Update 07.22.01
QUESTION: Here's the latest I've heard from EES regarding ways in which we've managed to thoroughly confuse them. I'm researching most of these questions, but as with last month, there are a few Real Time deals they don't see in the spreadsheet you guys send to them. Would you mind checking this out when you have a minute (or despite the fact that you don't)? If you revise anything, just let me know or e-mail it directly to Mark Confer and Brooklyn Couch. Thanks,
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS:
EES - April Deal Discrepancies