Q: Today FERC issued the following draft orders: NYISO TEP and Bid Cap (ER01-3001): Commission granted NYISO's request to extend the currently effective $1000/MWh Bid Caps on certain NYISO adminstered markets, and to extend its Temporary Extraordinary Procedures for Correcting Market Design Flaws and Addressing Transitional Abnormalities, until the Northeastern RTO is operational. The Commission ordered NYISO to narrow the scope of the TEP, and to file tariff sheets doing so within 30 days. NYISO proposed virtual bidding procedures (ER01-3009; ER01-3153): Tariff changes to implement virtual bidding were approved. The changes would allow market participants to bid non-physical generation and load into the day-ahead market and settle the bids in the real-time market. Also accepted were NYISOs Market Mitigation Measures to address gaming or market power strategies that might emerge as a result of the virtual bidding. NYISO - Cost responsibility for new interconnections. (ER01-2967): Tariff changes allocating cost responsibility for interconnection facilities. The provisions allocate to developers 100% of the cost of facilities necessary to physically interconnect the project. Additionally, developers are allocated the coswts for transmission system upgrades that would not have been made "but for" the interconnection, minus the cost of any facilities that the NYISO's regional plan dictates would have been necessary anyway for load growth and reliability purposes. ISO-NE - Interim Bid Caps (ER01-3086): Commission approved extension of bid caps until the Northeastern RTO is operational. Calpine v. ISO-NE (EL01-124): Commission granted complaint by Calpine and Mirant, finding that ISO-NE has amended Market Rule 5 to exclude external contracts from setting the energy clearing price, in violation of a Commission order. If you need further information, please let me know. Susan Lindberg x30596
Propose a subject line
A: Orders issued today in NYISO and ISO-NE proceedings
IN: See the new versions of the netting agreement forms below. All that has been done is to move the Force Majeure concept to paragraph 2(a) from 14(b). This allows the daily limit concept to stand in the UMAs, but it won't elevate to a default under the master netting arrangements. In certain instances if you want to "kill" the day limitation completely in the underlying agreement, you can always use the previous 14(b) language from the emailed docs earlier today. The docs remain at v1 (version 1).

Generate a subject line.

OUT: FORM CHANGE AGAIN!
IN: This is an email
Scott, Finally, here's the resolution on the Coenergy invoice for April, 1999. Coenergy is telling me that the we need to pay the difference $2.90 vs. $2.74 on 10,000 MMBtu per day. If this is true, please pay the difference of $0.155 to Coenergy on a volume of 10,000 MMBtu per day for April, 1999. If your understanding is different, please let me know, but otherwise please pay the difference. Thank you for your patience, and sorry it took so long to resolve.

What is the subject?

OUT: Coenergy
QUESTION: Here is another matrix of TW "Current Shipper" rates & surcharges. This one is not posted on the web. I don't know whether anyone needs/uses it, anymore, but I have been keeping it up. There is a new tab for each change in Current Shipper Rates. The latest is "200111" Elizabeth - I forgot to send this to you this morning. Jeanette - I don't recall whether I sent this along with the other TW files.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: FYI 11/2001 TW Rate Matrix - same rates, different format
POSREP HOEGH GALLEON 16TH. APRIL 0218LT (END OF VOYAGE) A) Position at noon : LAKE CHARLES ANCHORAGE B) Dist. from last noon : 187 n. miles (14,3 HRS.) C) Dist. to go to next port: Arrived Lake Charles D) Eta next port : E) 1:Average sea/weather : Wind: SE 2, Sea: SE 1 2:Average speed : 13,08 knots / average RPM 88,86 3:B.O.G. consumed : 215,852 4:F.O. consumed : 23 mt. 5:G.O. consumed : nil 6:Average vapor press. Tk. 1:0.091 bar. Average liq. temp: -158,7
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: DAILY POS. REPORT 16TH.
Hi all, We spoke to Rick Simpson in Hertzberg's office who related the following: The last meeting of Senate, Assembly, and Governor's staff was last Wednesday. The Senate staff has been advised that the Governor is not interested in having a bill that could only pass the Senate. He wants one that can get 41 votes in the Assembly as well, which means direct access would have to be included. Rick spoke to Brian Kelly of Burton's office on Friday. Brian said they are working on securitizing the interest costs. They are looking at something like 50-60 kw for the core/non-core number which would still be able to be financed even with fewer customers, although the transaction costs would be higher with a smaller customer base. I asked Rick if they expect all of their members to return and he said most of them would. I suggested that it had better be the right ones, or they'd have trouble getting to 41 votes. He said he wasn't sure at this point if a compromise bill could be ready by next Tuesday, but the Assembly is willing to try with the right bill. I spoke to John Burton a few minutes ago who reiterated that he will not look favorably upon including direct access although he understands that some business democrats in the Assembly need it to vote for a bailout. He said he spoke to an Assembly leader this morning who told him that even 78xx would get only 36 votes today if it came up for a vote (it squeeked through on 41). He is considering putting up 78xx for a vote on Tuesday (it will fail) and continuing discussions with the Governor's office after that. He said to tell you all that the bailout bill can't pass next week because it interferes with Scott and Gayle's wedding on the 14th, and coincidentally that is the last day for the Governor to sign or veto bills.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Special Session Notes