On October 2, I, Aaron Klem and our outside attorney, Jeanne Bennett, met with other ESPs, the utilities, and the Energy Division staff of the CPUC to hammer out an agreement on implementing the CPUC's order suspending direct access (DA) and handling continued submission of DASRs. It was news to the utilities that ESPs have many contracts -- most several years old -- that allow for addition and subtraction of facilities throughout the contract term. The utilities had thought that cutting off DASRs would be the best way to enforce the CPUC's order without having to review contracts (which they don't want to do). After much discussion and debate, the participants agreed to make a joint filing at the CPUC seeking quick action.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: ESP/UDC/CPUC Meeting on Implementation of DA Suspension
The National Energy Board has approved the TCPL 2001-2002 Settlement agreement in its entirety. The link to the Reasons for Decision (RH-1-2001)is attached below. Highlights - No change to current tolls pending final decision on Fair Return Hearing expected in late spring or summer, say June or July 2002 - AOS and FT Makeup Credits to IT Service to start effective Jan 1/02. - IT Floor floats monthly between 80-120% of FT depending on AECO MI and seasonal marginal fuel rate (at current prices expected to remain at 80%) - NEB expected to review Settlement Guidelines in near future (potentially opening door in future to FERC style negotiated tolls) Dianne Ripley (403-974-6913) is responsible for implementing AOS and FT Makeup for Enron Canada. She and I can both answer questions about how it works.
Answer: NEB Approves TCPL Settlement
Here is an email: In connection with the execution of the new ISDA Master Agreements between ECT and ECT Canada and PG&E Energy Trading Gas Corporation and PG& E Energy Trading, Canada Corporation, we, and they, will be issuing new "umbrella" guarantees that will cover all transactions between the above entities and also cover EPMI and PG&E Energy Trading - Power, L.P. and CEG Energy Options Inc. (a PG&E affiliate) These new guarantees will cover all physical, financial and power transactions between the above parties. I have sent them the original of my Enron Corp. Guaranty for $105,000,000 and have received in the original of the PG&E Corporation Guaranty for $100,000,000. Rod is resolving whether we agreed to increase the Enron Corp. guaranty to $110mm. In connection with the issuance of the new bilateral guarantees I need to return to them the originals of the following PG&E guarantees: (1) PG&E Corporation Guarantee dated as of March 28, 1998 covering business between Enron Power Marketing, Inc. and PG&E Energy Trading - Power, L.P., (2) PG&E Corporation Guarantee dated as of June 5, 1998 in favor of Enron Power Marketing, Inc. covering physical transactions, and (3) PG&E Energy Trading Corporation Guaranty dated March 11, 1997 covering physical business with ECT Canada. I will also be returning to you the returned originals of the Enron Corp. Prior Guarantees.
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Need Documents
Q: Mike, Could you add two new categories of products to the database for me. That would include the "Yes, Yes with Limits, and No" buttons and also a comment screen for the new products. The two new products are: Credit Derivatives and Bandwidth Thanks!
Propose a subject line
A: Legal Online Trading Database
IN: PLEASE KEEP THIS NOTE, AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE NOTE CONFIDENTIAL. As folks are aware, we have been engaged in closed-door negotiations for the past two weeks regarding a possible market-based solution to California's electricity crisis. In the room are the major large customer groups, environmentalists, small customers (TURN), Independent Energy Producers, labor, the Western States Petroleum Association, and Enron. The negotiations were convened by the Speaker of the Assembly (Bob Hertzberg). When Hertzberg convened the meeting, he told the parties that he wanted to achieve a core/noncore structure, similar to the structure in place in California's gas market (i.e., large customers are required to buy gas from the market, with Direct Access available to all other customers). In effect, "core" customers (rez and small business) would be served by the utilities' retained generating assets and QF contracts; and large customers would go to market. The core/noncore structure would begin 1.1.03. The negotiating group has struggled over the past two weeks, but is close devising a framework for core/noncore in Californis (but who pays for the utilities' past debts and the costs of DWR power purchased between January and today remain very contentious). Unfortunately, with the release of the information regarding the DWR contracts last Friday, it is now clear that achieving a core/noncore structure will be very difficult unless something is done to mitigate the contracts. The problem is that, if core is served by utility gen and QFs, and large customers are in the market, there is no (or very little) need for the DWR contracts. Instead, they look like a signficant stranded cost. Hertzberg and the negotiating group are looking to Enron for creative ways to address "the DWR contract problem" in order to prevent the contracts from 1) killing the core/noncore deal and 2) forcing California to accept a structure focused on a state power authority headed-up by David Freeman that does not include Direct Access. Christian Yoder and Steve Hall are reviewing the contracts to analyze any "out clauses" that the buyer and/or the seller might have under the contract provisions. (My cursory review of the contracts suggests that "outs" for the state are minimal or nonexistent.) In addition, we've started batting around ideas about how the State might reform the contracts. All this said, want to let everyone know that we have made it extremely clear that Enron fundamentally opposes any and all attempts to unilaterally abrogate anyone's contract rights. We'd like to have a quick call tomorrow (30-60 minutes) to brainstorm some options that we can offer Hertzberg to handle the contracts and keep the core/noncore solution alive. We'd like to try to have the the call at 1 PM PDT. Please let me know if this works for you, and if it doesn't, please let me know if there's a time after 1 PM PDT that works for you. Thanks,

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Call to Discuss Possible Options to Mitigate Effect of DWR Contracts--Privileged and Confidential
IN: This is an email
I will be out from this afternoon through the rest of this week. In my absence Stephanie Panus will be sending you the EOL Lists. Please direct any responses you have to the lists to ME, not to Stephanie. Thank you.

What is the subject?

OUT:
EOL Lists