Attached for your review and comments is a revised Confirmation for the EES Weather (snowfall cap option) product. I have also attached a blackline against the last draft distributed, as well as a copy of the last Terms and Conditions distributed (unchanged from prior draft) and the Credit Support Annex (also unchanged from prior draft). Unless informed otherwise, this product is scheduled for release no later than tomorrow so kindly send any comments to my attention ASAP, or let me know if you require additional review time. Please note also that the foregoing is not intended to imply that other procedures and approvals (eg. RAC Approval), if any, required for the introduction of new products by EES' / EWS' policies have been completed. Thanks,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Revised Weather Products
As both of you are well aware, ENA currently owes Midland Power Cooperative ("MPC") past due amounts for power delivered pursuant to an Agreement for Purchase of Power dated March 31, 1995 by and between ENA and MPC, as amended. I am working with Chip and Dave to determine if we can pay the past due amounts. Two questions need to be answered ASAP: 1) Is there any other entity that might be able to supply the power if ENA defaults under its agreement with MPC? 2) Is MPC considered a "utility"? Dave has learned that "utilities" cannot refuse to serve entities in bankruptcy on a going forward basis for failure to pay pre-petition obligations (so long as adequate assurances of future payments are provided). Gerald, you might need to consult with one of the bankruptcy lawyers to see how this determination is made. Please respond at your earliest possible convenience. Thanks
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: ENA - NNG Hubbard Transaction - Past Due bill from Midland Power Cooperative
ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT: NOT DISCOVERABLE Pursuant to a letter faxed to TVA today, January 27th, we notified TVA that EPMI was terminating the MOPA effective February 11, 2000 (earliest date permitted under the MOPA). At the same time, we filed an amended petition with the court in Tennessee where EPMI's current claim against TVA (interface issue) is pending seeking a declaratory judgment that EPMI had the right to terminate the MOPA. In order to include this additional claim in the already filed petition, we will need the approval of the court. Copies of the letter will be distributed later . Elizabeth Sager 36349
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: TVA - Termination of MOPA and Related Dec. Action
Executive Summary California Treasurer Angelides Sets Dates for Bridge Loans & Bonds California's Supreme Court May See Challenge to "Plan B" Angelides on Bridge Loans and Bonds CA Treasurer Angelides has said that beginning 15 August, the state will se= t up a bridge loan. The revenue bonds will not be issued until September o= r October. Angelides is not concerned about a cash crisis in July or Augus= t. However, he is quite worried about problems with cash flow in October a= nd November. This is based on calculations he has done with numbers from t= he DWR and from other parts of the government, not on payment terms for pow= er. He fears there will be a cash management problem. California Supreme Court to Challenge "Plan B" California Attorney Michael Sturmwasser is expected to challenge "Plan B" b= efore the California Supreme Court on the basis that it results in a retroa= ctive rate increase and that it removes the PUC's authority to review power= purchases. This is because "Plan B" enables SoCal to collect a dedicated = rate component to pay both its undercollect and its expenses going forward.= SoCal (and PG&E) would have to be guaranteed this dedicated rate componen= t to be able to operate going forward and remain credit-worthy. This takes= the burden of financing the energy crisis away from the state and off the = state's balance sheet, a key goal of lawmakers. However, at the same time,= it also abrogates the PUC from its responsibility to review power purchase= s. The state cannot give the utilities a blank check (in the form of a ded= icated rate component) to operate without taking authority away from the PU= C. According to the California constitution, the legislature can add to th= e responsibilities of the PUC, but it cannot take away powers from the PUC.= At the same time, ratepayers will be paying an additional surcharge for p= ower that they have already used. Sources describe Sturmwasser's case as "= arguable"; in other words, it has a fair chance of succeeding. However, re= gardless of whether the challenge succeeds or fails, it is very likely to c= loud the issue of the bail-out and significantly deflate the prospects of t= he Plan B. If FERC were to impose cost-based controls on power prices, sources believe= it might "go a long way toward avoiding these problems." Were this to hap= pen, the PUC could declare FERC's rates "just and reasonable," which would = likely greatly lessen the crisis and keep SoCal liquid. However, such meas= ures by FERC require significant lead time. Sources state that "the state = needs to tease the feds into doing this." This can be done by conducting s= tudies to obtain current cost data and update the data FERC would use for d= etermining the cost controls. Sources report that this process of "teasing= " FERC has not yet started. This is chiefly because California politicians= are focused on flat price caps, which FERC is very unlikely to impose. It= appears the state is asking FERC for the wrong measures, which is delaying= the process. The only way for the state to avoid these constitutional iss= ues would be for the state to purchase the utilities, as municipal entities= would not be subject to PUC regulation. However, there remains very signi= ficant opposition to this idea, especially on the Republican side. A state= purchase of the utilities would likely only gain momentum once Plan B bega= n to fail for the reasons cited above. Additionally, a state purchase of t= he utilities would be less expensive were both utilities in bankruptcy. Sturmwasser is a partner at Sturmwasser & Woocher, a Santa Monica law firm.= (His offices are on the top floor of the tallest building in Santa Monica= , overlooking the beach.) He has been a utilities lawyer for over 30 years= . His clients include the consumer advocacy group TURN (Toward Utilities R= ate Normalcy), among others. Sturmwasser will reportedly look for funding = to support the legal challenge, but if he cannot find money elsewhere, he w= ill likely be able to support it out of his own pocket.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
California Update 5/29/01