On October 17, 2001 Rockland Electric Company and PJM filed with FERC a joi= nt application for the transfer of operational control from the NYISO to PJ= M of certain facilities located in Northern New Jersey. The facilities are= the transmission assets in the Eastern Division of Rockland's service terr= itory. This includes approximately 400 MW of load in Bergen County, NJ and= transmission facilities that are already directly interconnected with PJM = (note that other Rockland facilities located in NJ, namely those in norther= n Passaic County and Sussex County (Rockland's Central and Western Division= s respectively) will not be transferred to PJM and will remain under the op= erational control of the NYISO since these facilities are not directly inte= rconnected with PJM nor with Rockland's Eastern Division). The filing requ= ests approval of the transfer by November 30, 2001 which would allow PJM to= take operational control on February 1, 2002 (the filing does not address = what, if any, changes to the operation date might be if FERC does not appro= ve this by Nov 30). Rockland Electric is a subsidiary of Orange & Rockland= Utilities which is a subsidiary of Con Edison. The transfer adds approximately 400 MW of load and 56,000 customers (mostly= residential and commercial) to PJM. There is no increase in supply, there= fore the total load of PJM is increased by 400 MW without any additional re= sources. The transmission assets include 138-kV (8.3 miles), 69-kV (35.9 m= iles) and 35-kV (12.4 miles) transmission lines and 11 substations (the fil= ing includes a detailed description of these assets). Let me know if you require any additional information.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Rockland Electric Transfer to PJM
Larry, Thanks for your time earlier today. I have attached the pipeline list - would appreciate your guidance on the liquidity, volatility and how we can best hedge our gas positions for these pipelines. Regards,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Pipeline List
Here are the updated files with the total throughput for both TW and NNG as well as the TW EOT Revenues. Note that the Burlington contract #25025 under the SJ tab really should belong under the EOT tab. However, since you already provided the SJ spreadsheets, I went ahead and deleted from the EOT spreadsheet that Jeanette forwarded to me). Please let me know if you have any problems.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Update Files for Total Throughput and TW EOT Revenues
President Lynch has today released the attached ACR concerning market valuation of the utilities retained assets. As you may know, AB 1890 originally required that for those generation-related assets that the Commission determines to be transition costs and that are subject to valuation, "the valuation used for the calculation of the uneconomic portion of the net book value shall be determined not later than December 31, 2001, and shall be based on appraisal, sale, or other divestiture." Lynch states that this requirement was changed by AB 6X and that, "I intend to recommend to my colleagues that the requirement to value generation-assets subject to valuation by December 31, 2001 has been superseded by AB 6X. Parties shall file and serve comments addressing this issue by January 15, 2002. Reply comments shall be filed and served by January 25, 2002." Dan
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Lynch Ruling re Market Valuation