Here is an email: The Southeast RTO orders are out and have followed through with what we exp= ected from the discussion at the FERC meeting. The SPP and Entergy RTO proposals have been rejected because they fail to s= atisfy the scope and configuration requirements of Order No. 2000. The Com= mission notes that the required discussions between SPP and Entergy and it= s neighboring RTO/TOs has led to no increase in the original scope and conf= iguration. The filings by SPP and Entergy were brief, indicating only a la= ck of interest by other RTOs or utilities in joining to enlarge scope; they= failed to specify any details of the talks, what changes could be made or = what could be fixed to accomodate combination with other RTOs. The order s= tates that the Commission favors the development of large, regional transmi= ssion organizations reflecting natural markets. The Commission indicates t= hat they favor four RTOs - NE, SE, MW and West. Therefore the order requir= es the participants in SPP and Entergy to participate in settlement discuss= ions as set out in the mediation order. Note that these meetings will star= t next Tuesday, July 17 before a FERC ALJ. The Southern Company RTO is also found by the FERC to fail the scope charac= teristics of Order No. 2000. The order finds that Southern's approach to f= ocus on MOUs and seams issues with its neighbors is inadequate. The order = states, "We reiterate: the Commission's goal is to have a single RTO in the= Southeast, and to have that single RTO operational as soon as possible." = The Commission recognizes that start-up costs in forming a larger RTO may b= e more, but that over the longer term, large RTOs will foster market develo= pment, will provide increased reliability and will result in lower wholesal= e electricity prices. The order therefore directs the parties to the media= tion as stated above. The Grid South participants are also directed to the mediation which is sta= rting on next Tuesday. It is a lengthier order with more details on other = aspects of RTOs, including Independent Board requirement, congestion managm= ent, interconnection procedures, planning process and CBM. Therefore, I am= attaching a summary of the order. One of the important findings of the or= der is that GridSouth is not sufficiently independent; the Applicant TOs ar= e making policy decisions that should be made by an independent board. The= refore, the order requires GridSouth to install an independent board and fi= le a compliance filing within 90 days. If anyone wants copies of the orders, let me know.
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: RTO Orders - Grid South, SE Trans, SPP and Entergy
Here is an email: Terrel and I had a conference call with BOC this morning. The call was very positive as they were still interested in talking with us. They had a number of questions regarding the contract terms and seems like they want to sign something by week end. I need clarification on a few issues that they raised. We need to give them answers tommorow. Proposed Contract terms: 1. Houston Zone: 1.95 MW +/- 15% per settlement Interval 2. South Zone: 2.75 MW +/- 10% per settlement Interval 3. North Zone: 15 MW +/- 10% per settlement Interval 4. West Zone: 1.75 MW +/- 10% per settlement Interval ** BOC going to Balancing Energy (+4% charges) outside the band ** 1. Interruptibility - BOC wanted to understand the mechanics. Specifically, they wanted to know how Enron would work with them to maximize curtailment opportunities. They also wanted to know the quantity they could curtail (e.g. If deal is 15 MW +/- 10%, can BOC curtail 16.5 MW, or just 15 MW). Also, do they pay any penalty when they curtail (4%, etc.) 2. Scheduled maintenance - Can they sell contract power a week forward. Is there any penalty for not being within the band during those hours. 3. BOC wants a fixed price quote for all Ancillaries and ERCOT Passthroughs. However they want the ability to unwind this fixed price position should they feel they are better off with ERCOT market prices once the market becomes more transparent. What is Enron's ability to provide such a service? 4. BOC doesnt like the 4% charge in excess of Balancing Energy everytime they are outside the Quantity Band. They said that they dont want to pay more when prices are high and they are outside the band. They want a fixed fee instead of 4% of BES price. Given the bands we have placed in the contract, BOC was outside the band a. 15% of the time in their Houston Zone Interval Load b. 10% of the time in their South Zone Interval Load c. less than 1% of the time in their North Zone Interval Load d. 3% of the time in their South Zone Interval Load Regards
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: BOC Gases Contract
Here is an email: Good Morning, Here are this week's stats: AGA Last Year +105 5 yr AVG +89 Lifetime High +105 2001 Lifetime Low +63 1999 Gas in STGE EIA 1893 5yr AVG 1482 +/- to 2001 +495 +/- to 5yr AVG +411 Please have your estimates in by 2:00 (1:00 CST) Wednesday. Thank you. (Embedded image moved to file: pic08160.pcx) This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified.
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A:
BNP PARIBAS Commodity Futures Weekly EIA Survey