IN: This is an email
Hi guys. We need to add the CES demand charges to the East Desk P&L. The impact to the desk is ($694,399). This includes the demand charge paid to CALP and the reimbursements for the Penn Fuel capacity. It does not include any demand charges paid to Dayton Power & Light. How are we accounting for that? The file is under o:/logistics/capacity/east/ne/ces/2000ces01.xls Use tab CES WHOLESALE. All the demand charges under CES RETAIL are reimbursed. I sure we are missing some things. Scott Goodell will be going through this worksheet tomorrow.

What is the subject?

OUT: CES Demand Charges
QUESTION: You had a question about the meaning of Section 4.3. Here's a brief explanation. Section 4.2 covers indemnification in case one party gets sued by a third party for damage caused by negligence of the other party. I'm OK with eliminating "stockholders" and the "...judgments of any nature..." clause you two spoke about on the phone as long as they come out of both subparagraphs a. and b. Section 4.3 needs to stay in because it covers any potential action by EPFS against TW for damage to EPFS's facilities during the term of the agreement. TW is already obligated elsewhere in the agreement to construct and operate the facilities in accordance with industry practice, tariff and DOT standards. Our policy in interconnect agreements is that if TW complies with these standards we should not then somehow be liable for damage to EPFS in case of explosion, etc. In other words, both parties bear the risk attached to something unforeseeable going wrong notwithstanding use of industry and DOT standards. (By the way, I believe the "notwithstanding anything in this Article 4 to the contrary" language should come out; I'm not sure why it's in the draft.) Any questions -- please e-mail or call (713-853-0596).
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: TW/EPFS interconnect agreement
Got your message re: reverse auction all of the utility's demand. Getting (interestingly complicated), though. Now, the utilities want to create a "core/noncore" split in electricity, like in gas (where large gas customers can't take commodity from the utility). With a core/noncore split, Edison claims that QF contracts, nukes and other existing generation that it still holds is sufficient to meet "core" needs and it therefore may not need "contracts." As you can imagine, large customers ain't clamoring to get thrown into the market as "noncore" customers right about now. But they may find themselves without a choice. I talked to Calger on Friday about reverse auction versus benchmark and I'll be talking to the traders about it this afternoon, and we'll be discussing further when Rick, Steffes et al are here tomorrow. Will let you know where it goes. Best,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Reverse Auction
Here is a rough draft of the Fehr option. Herman, you will be happy to know that this one is much shorter. It needs some clean up, but this should be enough to get comments going. Kay
Answer: Fehr option
Here is an email: Alan, Further to our conversation, attached is the final version of the Spot Purchase/Sale Agreement. Please sign two agreements and return same to my attention at the location listed below. Upon final execution, I will forward an original for your records. Should you have any questions and or comments, do not hesitate to give me a call. Best regards,
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Master Spot Purchase/Sale Agreement
QUESTION: 1) Since I'm coming, I'll likely stay a couple of days, if there's still an open seat available on the floor. 2) I can get a plane that arrives at Intercontinental at 12:20. Can I catch a cab and get to the Woodlands by 1? Otherwise, I'll come out the night before. Best,
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS:
couple things