input stringlengths 93 39k | output stringlengths 1 117 |
|---|---|
Hi.
FYI.
Yesterday a deal was submitted to the California Commission (without just about everyone in the industry signing) to restructure Socalgas.
More details to come, but wanted to give a flavor, knowing that you're actively engaged in negotiations.
Assuming a 10.01.00 approval date by the Commission: 90 days after approval Windowing process replaced with OFO system Interstate capacity unbundled for core customers effective April 2001: Ability to balance using 3rd party provider Open season for Socal storage Secondary market for storage (using Alltrade if want to) Trade OFO imbalances and imbalance rights (using Alltrade if want to ) effective Octover 2001: Open season for Socal intrastate capacity Secondary market for intrastate capacity (using Alltrade if want to) Pooling at new city gates
| Deal Struck in CA to Restructure Socalgas |
FYI.
******************************************************** Reuters -& CNBC *PG&E <PCG.N> SAYS PACIFIC G&E FILED FOR CHAPTER 11 VOLUNTARY BANKRUPTCY RELIEF NEW YORK, April 6 (Reuters) - Pacific Gas & Electric Co., which is California's largest investor-owned utility and has been struggling with that state's power crisis, said on Friday it filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy protection with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California.
Trading was halted in PG&E shares on the New York Stock Exchange before the filing.
They last traded at $11.36, down 2 cents.
The Chapter 11 filing was disclosed in mirror filings by the utility and its parent, San Francisco-based PG&E Corp. <PCG.N>, with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The utility said in the filing that it "retains control of its assets and is authorized to operate its business as a debtor in possession while being subject to the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court."
A 1996 state utility law deregulated wholesale prices but capped retail prices.
Pacific G&E has said it accumulated more than $8.9 billion of back debts because a rate freeze prevents it from passing on its soaring wholesale power costs to consumers.
ADVISORY/Pacific Gas and Electric Company to Hold Media Teleco OTC HALT <PCG.N> NEWS PENDING LAST $11.36
| *PG&E <PCG.N> SAYS PACIFIC G&E FILED FOR CHAPTER 11 VOLUNTARY |
Greeatings Tom: I'm looking at hard copies of documents titled: Emergency Measures for Western Power Markets Possible Western electricity emergency plan elements Could you send me electronic versions?
Much appreciated.
I'll get back to you with more siting information (per your email) on Monday.
Best,
| Electronic copies of a couple documents |
Scott/Cameron: OK, wondering why there ain't no charges on your credit card from our FABULOUS trip to Squaw Valley?
I just found out that they're all on mine!!?!?!?
I had the best time up there, but I couldn't figure out how it coulda cost $1700.
Just called them to inquire.
They said: There's no mistake those are all the carges for rooms 432 and 450.
They're sending receipts.
Unreal.
Best,
| Merry Xmas? |
Eldoni: I'm assuming, since I haven't heard back, that we're going to take a pass this time on the Dome road, and perhaps have Jeff Green do it another time?
If I'm incorrect, we'll need to get things squared away, like today.
Let me know, Jeff
| No Road? |
Greetings: Sue Landwehr will be sending around a more comprehensive summary of what happened at today's FERC hearnig in Boise but asked me to pass along the following.
Each state was only allowed to have two people at the table.
For California it was Assembly Speaker Hertzberg and Geoff Brown (newly appointed CA PUC Commissioner).
Hertzberg did a credible, matter-of-fact job of explaining what California's doing to resolve the crisis (nice to know that there's someone out there who can explain what the heck California's doing).
Hertzberg then asked that FERC do "its part" by imposing price caps in Western wholesale markets.
Hertzberg didn't mention the PG&E bankruptcy or Davis' deal with Edison.
Overall, the "no price cap" message won the day (though Breathitt seems to be under considerable pressure to give in to caps).
The Governor of Arizona (Jane Hull) had a staffer deliver a letter signed by 9 republicant governors opposing price caps.
Sue will be distributing the letter.
Best,
| FERC Hearing in Boise |
Hi.
I've got all the paperwork.
The bill (on my bill) for you guys is $740.
I'll get you the paperwork tonite.
Sorry for the mix-up (should I ask Squaw for a discount due to all the mess!?!?).
Best,
| Grand total is....! |
As I feared, Belden's on vacation this week.
I've left a message with him to call, however.
Will let you know just as soon as (and if) I hear anything.
Best,
| Belden--TX Anecdotes |
Harry: At the meeting yesterday, we concluded that it would be a good idea to take the proposal that you put together based on your meeting with EES and use it as the "base case" to start running the numbers.
Idea being that before we shop anything around, we need to know what the numbers look like to determine whether the thing's got any legs.
Once we have a clear understanding of how the base case numbers shake out, we thought we might then want do some sensitivity analyses around the variables, come up with a final proposal, and then go back to the commercial groups for buy-in.
We hoped that your folks could get together with Roger Yang et al and provide some assessment of what the base case numbers look like by middle of next week.
How's this plan sound?
Few other points: We assume that bullet 6's reference to "net" means that the deferral is calculated by taking any "overcollections" and subtracting them from any "undercollections" over the entire 3 year period,not year-by-year.
What is the significance of the 3.1 CTC roll-off date?
We're assuming it's commercially driven.
We correct?
If so, what's the driver?
Same goes for the 2004 ending date.
Some tweeks were made to the proposal at the meeting to create an "Option 2" for folks to consider.
(Though we don't think that any numbers need to be run on "Option 2" until after having completed the analysis on option 1, since those results could influence any scenarios we decide to construct).
Option 2 would: Keep the hydro with the utility and apply Edison's proposed ratemaking treatment.
Beginning 6.1.01, make large customers "noncore," similar to the gas model in California, and force those customers to choose an ESP.
Beginning 1.1.03, introduce competitive default service for remaining "core" (i.e., rez and small commercial) customers.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Finally, couple of things that occurred to me after yesterday's meeting that I want to throw out for folks to react to: Seems that, to be successful, the proposal needs to remain as stripped down and simple as possible.
When the proposal nets out the deferral costs, does it include the over/undercollections associated with utility residual generation?
In option 2, by adding the "noncore" feature, and by implementing that feature and the default service feature prior to the 04 ending date, the proposal gets more complicated (and adds significantly more risk to the utility's position).
This is not to say that the complications can't be worked out, or that the added risk can't be accounted for, but wanted to highlight it for folks to consider.
Attached is the original, with just a couple of minor edits, and "Option 2."
Best,
| PG&E Proposed Solution |
OK folks.
It's about 80% of the way there.
My brains are oozing out looking at cells, so I want to get this around so Mark can get started on refining assumptions and other folks can examine as well.
I'll continue to check it and de-bug it.
Mark, you and I should talk, too.
(You'll note that at this point, the valuation is in the $30s, so there's work to do.)
Apologies in advance for any errors (and I'm sure they're there).
If anyone has any questions on the model, just let me know.
I think we ought to get together to meet this week as much as possible to start getting the power point presentation together.
And perhaps we should think about meeting this weekend?
In the meantime, I'm pulling together the data on Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway) stock performance, etc., and will also do the financial ratios, including Dupont, for OAT.
Does this work for folks?
Other thoughts?
Best,
| OAT Valuation Model |
Here's the original note that I sent about the bill (yours and ms cameron's) that ended up on my bill.
************************************************************************ Hi.
I've got all the paperwork.
The bill (on my bill) for you guys is $740.
I'll get you the paperwork tonite.
Sorry for the mix-up (should I ask Squaw for a discount due to all the mess!?!?
).
| Squaw Bill |
FYI.
The agenda for the legislative oversight committee's gas hearing tomorrow includes two Brattle Group consultants, Paul Carpenter and Matt O'Loughlin.
They will make up the first panel, titled, "California's High Natural Gas Prices: Market Power and Other Factors."
In California's gas wars, Edison hired these folks--Carpenter in particular--
| Legislative Hearing on Gas |
What time do you get home from school.
If it's before 5 could you stop by the Theater on the Square box office and get tickets?
Cameron said that she and Scott want tickets, too.
It's going to sell out (if it ain't already sold out), so we should probably do it quickly.
I love you.
| Sam Shepard Play |
Here's the document that I referenced.
Dan Allegretti asked me to forward it to you.
He'd like to distribute to the leadership team and have it on the agenda during his part of the conference call.
Thanks a million.
Best,
| NRDC's Proposed Competitive Default Provider Leg for California |
Dorothy: Thanks very much for the meeting yesterday.
From my perspective it was ver= y=20 useful.
Per yesterday's conversation.
More (much) to follow (soon).
This is what = we=20 gave the Govenor, Hertzberg, Burton, Brulte, etc., about 2 months ago (i.e.= ,=20 prior to Davis' 20-20 announcement, etc.)
You know how to get a hold of me.
Best,
| Demand Buy-down |
FYI.
Presentation by Brattle Group before CA leg committee yesterday in which they assert market power at the CA border (held by "out-of-state suppliers") explains high gas prices in California.
If you have any questions, call me at 415.782.7822.
Please forward to others whom you think might be interested.
Stephanie, could you forward along to Barry?
Best,
| Sacramento Pres Final 4_13_01(projected).ppt |
Jennifer.
I apologize.
I have to turn to assignment that Steve Kean just gave me.
I made it almost all the way through the document.
You did a fantastic job under the circumstances and given the time constraints.
If I can get Steve's assignment finished quickly, I will turn my attention back to this.
Hope it helps.
Best,
| CA Solution |
Today's the 7th anniversary of the release of the California Commission's now infamous "Blue Book" that launched Direct Access.
Would it be bad taste for Skilling to note the anniversary on the call with Bryson?
Viva Choice.... Best,
| I'm Choked Up |
Karen: See highlited section of story below.
PG&E's got it right.
Recall that DWR was only buying power that it determined was "priced reasonably."
Consequently, the net short wasn't getting picked up.
That meant that the ISO would have to go to the real-time market to close the gap.
The ISO would then charge the utilities for the power purchased.
Recall that Bob Glynn referenced the $300 MM/month that continued to pile up on PG&E's balance sheet as one of the several reasons that PG&E put itself into bankruptcy.
Now that PG&E's in bankruptcy, the state is now responsible for the full net short, and can't continue to sluff it off onto PG&E's balance sheet.
So it's therefore no surprise that the State's daily bill for power purchases has increased dramatically---just not for any of the bogus reasons cited by
| CA legislature in doubt |
Greetings TJ: Well I'm in a pickle.
The memo you sent said we had from 11:30 AM to 10:00PM on 4.19, and from 7 AM to 9 AM on 4.20.
But the documentation I received from Telebears said from 1 PM on 4.19 to 1 PM on 4.20.
All that aside, I have obviously missed the times, it's my fault, and I apologize.
I spoke with Diane this morning and she suggested that I throw myself at the mercy of the court by writing you an email with my picks.
Here they are:
| Class Registration |
Hey there stranger: By the looks of your attire (very nice), and the pace of you walk the other night, looks like you're back in the working groove.
Hope work is fun and your classes are good.
I'm trying to get used to the "no life" thing again.
And you slacked on the happy hour.
Best,
| Hectic? |
I nabbed the Co's 4 tickets (not great, but free) for the game against the Bums on Wed June 27th.
Starts at 4 PM.
Interested.
The Tuesday game's at 7:30, but thought it'd be nice to see an early game.
Let me know.
Best,
| The Bums |
FYI: Here's monthly share price date over last five years for: OAT, KO, PEP, S&P, BRKA, BRKB.
(I included Berkshire in the event we want to say something about Buffet's recent performance.
I've attached another file with a chart that shows Buffet versus S&P for 1, 3 and 5 year performance) For the OAT, KO, PEP, etc.
file, calculated year-on-year performance (excluding dividends).
Also, you'll see highlighted in yellow month-on-month performance for 2001.
But ain't done any chart for that stuff yet.
Thought we'd discuss first.
Best,
| share price data |
Christine: My apologies.
My schedule melted down after we talked on Monday.
Here's where folks came out.
There's some concern about size.
We're supposed to be no larger than 3, but we lobbied Aceves and he apparently Ok'd our "oversized" group.
The other folks in the group--who talked to him
| Teams |
No smoking gun in natural-gas cost probe By Jim Sanders Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 23, 2001) It strikes at the heart of an energy crisis that has caused multibillion-dollar losses and could plunge California's economy into a tailspin: Did private companies manipulate markets to get rich off consumers' pain?
An Assembly oversight committee spent hours last week grilling officials of El Paso Natural Gas Co. and an affiliate, El Paso Merchant Energy, companies that were accused by state regulators of anti-competitive practices that helped send gas prices soaring.
Committee Chairman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said the hearing convinced him that El Paso exercised "market power" -- undue influence over
| El Paso Hearings at PUC Legislature |
Here are my comments.
Great job.
I think that the rate design table is a little impenetrable for folks who ain't close to it.
It might benefit from an addition bullet of explanation.
Best,
| comments on CA solution |
Gang: I'm finalizing what we talked about yesterday and something struck me w.r.t.
siting reform.
One of our key messages in California and nationally is that price spikes are due in no small part to outmoded, arcane siting rules and a shortage of power as a result.
Price spikes have led to wholesale and retail price caps, investigations, utility under-recovery, and threats of rolling back de-regulation, to name a few.
Understanding that Dave raises some good points about why he's not thrilled about getting involved in more siting reform bills, could someone argue that from a corporate objective, getting a good siting reform bill passed this session is a fairly high priority?
I'm not sure what the answer is, but it struck me as I was pretty-ing up the document and I thought I'd put it out there for reaction.
Best,
| Siting strategy |
Greetings folks: Just checking in to see how we're doing and if folks got the files that I sent last night.
Should we try to meet at 5:30 to do a final run through?
I think that we might be the very first presentation (yikes).
Best,
| Checking in |
FYI.
As you recall, based on the meeting that I attended at SVMG with Karen Denne and Jeff Skilling, they put me on their internal distribution list (though I'm not sure that they realize it).
Here's the latest from Carl Guardino, the groups Exec Dir, and Davis appointee to the ISO.
Best,
| Important - Save Money/Energy |
Greetings Rosie: As you confirm meetings with Mr. Lay next week, could you drop a line to Maureen, Janel and me?
Thanks very much.
Best,
| Mr. Lay's Meetings in California |
Just for the record, I just reviewed my "Jeff's Goals for 2001" that Paul and I worked up, and "doing time for the company" didn't make the list this year.
Paul, I double-checked and "dating Loretta Lynch" is, likewise, not on the list.
Best,
| If it don't fit, you must acquit |
Jim: Here's the DG stuff from the Hertzberg letter ***************************************************************************= 8 Key Barriers to the Development of Distributed Generation and Proposals to= =20 Remove the Barriers Barrier: Excessive and Unnecessary Utility Stand-by Charges Solution The executive orders issued by the Governor on February 14th took a step in= =20 the right direction, but don=01,t go nearly far enough.
Utility stand-by= =20 charges have always been designed by the utilities to protect their monopol= y=20 position, extract monopoly prices from customers, or both.
They must be=20 eliminated for all distributed generation applications.
There is no reason= =20 to limit the elimination of these charges to generation facilities that are= =20 less than 1MW.
These limits will only lengthen unnecessarily the time it= =20 takes for California to close the significant gap between supply and demand= =20 and reduce the risk of black outs this summer.=20 The provisions of SB27X eliminating stand-by charges were stripped from the= =20 bill.
This will likely thwart any attempts to encourage the near-term=20 development of distributed generation and reduce the severe supply-demand= =20 imbalance in California.
The language eliminating stand-by charges should be re-inserted into SB27X= =20 and modified to remove all caps on plant size.=20 =20 Barrier: Excessive delays and costs related to interconnecting facilities= =20 with investor-owned and municipal utilities Solution: =20 The Governor=01,s executive order regarding interconnection is a step in th= e=20 right direction=01*D-D-26-01 requires utilities to complete interconnection= =20 studies within 7 days.
California should ensure that this requirement=20 applies to all generation facilities, including distributed generation.
In= =20 addition, the financial conflicts the utilities face when interconnecting= =20 generation facilities are simply too powerful to overcome through executive= =20 orders or other regulations.
=20 To the greatest extent possible, California should shift control over=20 interconnection away from the utility and place that control with the=20 California ISO.
This could be accomplished through amendments to SB 27X.
Barrier: Permitting and Air Quality Issues Developers of distributed (i.e., =01&on-site=018) generation that is 50 MWs= or=20 greater must receive certification from the California Energy Commission an= d=20 therefore face all of the impediments to development that large-scale=20 generation faces.
=20 Solution:=20 California should ensure that the executive orders (D-22-01 thru D-26-01)= =20 issued by the Governor to expedite plant siting and maximize plant output= =20 apply equally to smaller scale, =01&distributed generation=018 facilities.
= In=20 addition, distributed generation that is less than 50 MWs continues to face= =20 local opposition.
The State should ensure that local, parochial interests= =20 cannot block otherwise beneficial distributed generation projects.
=20 These objectives could be accomplished through amendments to SB27X.
| DG Impediments |
PR01: 174 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 04/26/2001 GOVERNOR DAVIS SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO PROVIDE POWER TO CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO Governor Gray Davis has signed three executive orders to increase stabilization, conservation and generation of power in California.
Executive Order D-34-01 Many numerous and complicated statutes, regulations, policies and procedures are delaying deployment of the energy conservation funding outlined in SB 5X and AB 29X signed by the Governor two weeks ago.
Executive Order D-34-01 will speed up implementation of the measures.
Together, the two bills provide over $850 million for energy conservation and distributed generation programs designed to save over 2,000 megawatts this summer.
With the Executive Order, the Energy Commission will not have to go through the cumbersome process of guideline adoption to approve funding.
The programs in the demand reduction program that will be streamlined included: Public Agency Loans and Grants (ECAA); Time-Of-Use and Real-Time Meters; Municipal Program; and Cool Roofs/Building Materials Executive Order D-33-01 Governor Davis signed Executive Order D-33-01 to extend the conservation rebate of the "20/20" program to the customers in the territory serviced by the San Diego Gas and Electric Company.
The program is designed to help the state avoid the likelihood of blackouts this summer and reward consumers who significantly conserve energy.
In addition, it could save the state up to $1.3 billion in power costs by reducing the amount of electricity the state must buy during expensive summer peak periods.
Executive Order D-32-01 In Executive Order D-32-01, Governor Davis orders the transfer of funds from the Energy Commission to the Department of Water Resources for implementation of the power plant construction incentive program.
Incentives will include: $5,000 per megawatt (MW) of average electrical output on the first 100 MW and $2,500 per MW for each MW above 100 MW, if brought on-line by July 1, 2001; $4,000 per MW of average electrical output on the first 100 MW and $2,000 per MW for each MW above 100 MW, if brought on-line between July 2, 2001 and August 1, 2001; and $3,000 per MW of average electrical output on the first 100 MW and $1,500 per MW for each MW above 100 MW, if brought on-line between August 2, 2001 and August 31, 2001.
Executive Order D-32-01 Executive Order D-33-01 Executive Order D-34-01
| GOVERNOR DAVIS SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDERS |
Hi Anita: Thanks again for you help with the questions I had about the deals going on California.
I'd like to follow-up with you and Steve, particularly regarding the "not a telecom" aspect of the deal.
These deals are going to accelerate--very confidentially, they are directly linked to getting the
| Follow up |
Subject: LADWP, BC Hydro, Bonneville Accused of Gouging California Energy Cost Study Critical of Public Agencies Too Power: DWP is among three government-run producers cited as driving prices up.
Spokesmen deny any market manipulation.
By ROBERT J. LOPEZ, RICH CONNELL, Times Staff Writers ???
?Government-owned utilities, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, were influential in driving wholesale electricity prices to levels that helped ignite California's exploding energy crisis during the summer and fall, according to public and confidential records.
????
?For months, Gov.
Gray Davis, legislators and consumer advocates have chiefly blamed a few private power companies for throwing the state into darkness and economic chaos.
????
?But they are just part of the equation.
????
?A confidential document obtained by The Times names power providers that have allegedly manipulated the electricity market.
While the document does identify out-of-state merchants criticized for gouging, it also discloses for the first time the extent to which public entities allegedly have maximized profits in the volatile spot market.
????
?The document--which decodes the identities of unnamed suppliers in a
| LADWP, BC Hydro, Bonneville Accused of Gouging California |
Received a call this afternoon from Gordon Smith, CEO of PG&E (I met Gordon when he was CFO of PG&E and I was a bureaucrat at the PUC working on the Blue Book).
He was following up from the meeting this morning with Bob Glynn.
He was very positive about the comprehensive solution that Ken Lay described to Glynn at this morning's meeting.
He was particularly positive about the core/noncore proposal.
He asked to meet to discuss it further.
I have an appointment to meet with him Monday afternoon.
He offered--as a board member
| Call from PG&E's CEO |
Roger: We're still ruminating on this within Government Affairs and will continue to ruminate over the next few days, but wanted to fill you in on where we currently are and get your comments.
Thanks.
Jeff
| PG&E Proposed Solution |
FYI.
Ken Lay asked to have the pitch that he's been making California be quickly put into a few power point slides for use in meetings he's having this week at the gathering of the Business Council (back East) with a group of California CEOs (e.g., Sun, Chevron, Amgen, Bechtel and others).
This is the version that we gave to Lay's office; he may have modified it.
Will check with Rosalee to get the final and distribute that version if changes were made.
Best,
| Presentation for K. Lay to CEOs re: Proposal K. Lay's Been Making in California |
Met early this morning with Jack Steward (pres.
of CMA) and Keith McCrea (lawyer for CMA) to follow up on the meeting that Steve and I had with them regarding the proposal Ken Lay was pushing last week: They like taking Tx out of the MOU, they like getting DWR out of the power purchase business, and they think that Edison's MOU needs a little haircut.
McCrea pushed back initially on core/noncore ("why should it be mandatory to go the market?
"), but after much discussion they agreed that our idea for core/noncore has a lot of merit.
Our idea is that 1) the core/noncore would take effect in 18-24 months, when the markets settle and prices come down, 2) everyone (core and noncore) should pay for DWR's "past" purchases, since everyone consumed it, 3) core customers should take IOU generation, QFs and DWR contracts (which eliminates the core's "net short" position, and 4) noncore would go to market and would not have to pay for any of DWR's "going forward costs" (since core gets them, in exchange for getting all the low-cost IOU generation) I told them we are still crunching the numbers to see what the rate effects would be and would share it with them when we're done.
While they are supportive of this approach and agreed that it would be useful to continue to flesh it out, they are not convinced that it will get the necessary support to get passed.
They are also withholding final judgment until they see all the numbers, i.e., we've still got some work to do.
They are very cynical about anything getting solved in California, and are extremely upset about the PUC's proposed rate decisions released by the judge and Loretta Lynch.
They place very little trust in the Governor or the Legislature.
Interestingly, the rate increase decisions, coupled with calls in Sacramento for an immediate move to core/noncore, makes our proposal very attractive to CMA.
Nonetheless, they said that they will continue to engage and are willing to commit to continue meet to try to get California's mess resolved.
| Follow-up Meeting this Morning w/CMA |
My apologies.
I took a vacation that I was in much need of, and as you know, it's more hectic trying to take off on vacation than it is coping with the day-to-day mess.
And I came back to utter chaos.
Regarding my homework assignment, I checked my records and, lo and behold, I am completely vested.
That said, I also thought long and hard about making a switch and came to the conclusion that the switch would need to be a significant one in order to make leaving a compelling proposition.
Of course, it goes without saying that working with you is about as compelling as it gets, but when I stack up the other pieces of the puzzle, they seem somewhat less compelling than the opportunity to work with you.
It is so enticing.
But it is with extreme regret that I am inclined to decline your gracious offer.
Would be happy to discuss it further, and you know without me saying that I am honored that you considered me and greatly appreciative.
Give a holler when you find a minute.
Best,
| Late Homework |
This is a very good, easily digestible summary of the FERC order.
Alan Zaremberg, CEO of the Chamber and located in Sacramento, asked if we had a summary that we could provide him.
Zaremberg is convinced that no one in California understands what FERC did and wanted to try to educate them.
If we sanitize it to remove anything sensitive, are folks comfortable providing it to Zaremberg?
Thanks.
Best,
| FERC summary |
Hi Alan: In our ongoing analysis of the MOU, and in our attempt to put together a solution for California, we need to do a reality check on the implied curves the Governor's consultants are using to arrive at their rate proposals.
To ensure an "apples to apples" comparison, we're hoping to get our curve data for 24X7 power, averaged on a quarterly basis, from 2001-2010.
Hoping that you can get that for us.
That possible?
Let me know.
Thanks a bunch.
Best,
| More Curves |
OK, I apologize, I've been trying to lock myself to the computer and crunch some #'s, but can't seem to get control of my schedule.
Wanted to lay out the core/noncore model that's been pitched (and that CMA showed keen interest in this morning) to see if we're all on the same page; but perhaps this is the analysis that you're already working on: Split takes place either 1.1.03 or 6.1.03.
Core and noncore are responsible for the "DWR past purchases" (spread over 15 years).
Core will keep IOU gen, QFs and DWR contracts (which would eliminate the short for the core) Noncore, in return for giving up the lucrative IOU gen, effectively accepts the short position (i.e., goes to market) AND does not get sacked with DWR's going forward costs (with "forward costs" defined as all power costs attributable to the "post-core/noncore" transition date.
Let me know if this tracks with where we're headed.
Thanks.
Best,
| Concept for core/noncore Analysis |
Hi Maureen: Could you ask Steve if he will be able to make the 4:30 (CST) with Laura Tyson?
I think you 've got the call-in number.
Tell him it's not big deal if he can't--I can handle--but if he can, it might be useful for him to be on
| 4:30 with Steve |
Greetings Piper: My name is Jeff Dasovich.
I'm in Enron's San Francisco office.
I think you've spoken with Karen Denne.
Scott asked for some background materials on our proposed solution to California's electricity crisis.
I'll be forwarding those to you sometime between 5 and 6 PM PDT.
Does that work for you?
Best,
| Materials for Scott McNealy |
Hi Piper: The email I sent on Friday to Scott McNealy's address (listed below) got bounced back to me.
Just wanted to make sure that you folks received the materials.
Best,
| Background for Enron Solution to California's Electricity Crisis--Follow up from Meeting on 5.10.01 |
Greetings: As folks heard, Ken Lay met with some California CEOs last Friday back East.
As a result of that meeting, McNealy, CEO for Sun, asked for some background and more detail on what Ken Lay proposed as a solution for California during his meetings in California over the past couple of weeks.
McNealy and others have expressed a willingness to make phone calls to policymakers, etc.
to try to advance the ball.
I pulled this together very hastily on Friday and take responsibility for all errors, omissions, ramblings, etc.
Wanted to distribute, however, to make sure that all had the info that is getting distributed.
Know folks are busy, but this will likely get distributed to other CEOs this week, so any comments, suggestions, etc.
about how to improve are welcome and appreciated.
Best,
| Backgrounder for McNealy |
It was a beautiful day (and evening).
Congratulations to you both.
It is a very sweet thing for two very sweet people, and I'm sort of choked up for being asked to be in the wedding party.
It was a great day for everybody.
Congratulations.
Best,
| Congratz |
"Plan B" As folks know, there's a group of moderate Democrats in the CA Assembly that has been working on a "Plan B."
They've been working on it because they're not satisfied with the Governor's MOU with Edison.
The Plan B group has been talking to a broad array of stakeholders, including Republicans, to get input into how "Plan B" can improve upon the MOU.
First the good news about Plan B: a fairly bright group of legislators is rolling up its sleeves and attempting to come up with a centrist solution to the problem, and they're at least creating the appearance of trying to be bi-partison about it.
(There is at least one idea in Plan B that is attributable to a Republican--Keith Richman--that Ken Lay met with a couple
| Legislators' "Plan B" to "Enhance" Governor's MOU w/Edison and Status Report |
Hi Maureen: Steve should have received via fax from Scott Govenar a letter to Hertzberg and Burton from the Republican leadership in the CA Legislature.
The letter 1) conveys a strong willingness on the part of the Republicans to work together to solve the problem and 2) provides an outline of the key components of a comprehensive solution.
Could you please get a copy of the letter to Rosalee; and Rosalee could you get a copy of the letter to Ken Lay?
Thanks very much for your help.
Best,
| Letter from California Republican leadership to Hertzberg/Burton--Proposal to Resolve California's Crisis |
The place (outside) is a mess and needs some clean-up (e.g., get all that old wood out of the front yard, whack down the weeds).
Possible for you guys to come up next Wednesday night and we can do a quick clean up on Thursday.
I'm going to try to hire a hauling company to help us and haul it away.
If Cameron has to work are you available?
Best,
| Memorial Day |
Greetings: Please see attached file.
Do have have the information necessary to add a final column "Rates Established in Final Order?"
Could you let me know?
Thanks.
Best,
| Final Rates from Yesterday's PUC Decision |
Here it is.
See you at Sun bright and early.
At this point, I'm planning on accompanying you to LA, but we can play by ear.
Best,
| California Status Report |
PG&E will announce via press release very early next week an open season on Redwood, Baja and Silverado.
It comes in direct response to recent announcements of expansions into California by pipelines.
The bid protocols will be structured similar to original open season from the original Gas Accord.
The open season will start on June 1 and end on July 31.
Capacity will be available starting 1.1.03.
Bidders will be able to bid up to 30 years (PG&E states that that's what generators want).
Accompanying the announcement will be another announcement that PG&E will expand Redwood by 200mmcf/day, which they hope to have available by 1.1.03, or some time during Q103.
About 2-4 weeks after the open season begins, PG&E will file its proposed "Gas Accord II," (the first one expires end of 02).
As part of that filing, PG&E will offer its proposed ratemaking treatment for the next five years (beginning 1.1.03).
PG&E will not include in the open season 1) core capacity and 2) certain EAD contracts that extend beyond the Gas Accord 1 end date.
In addition, PG&E will hold back an additional 20% (after excluding core and EAD), to be "open-seasoned" at some "future" date.
The capacity to be auctioned is: 1) 900 mmcf/day on Redwood, 2) 245 (annual) on Baja, plus an additional 200/day in summer on Baja, 3) 155 on Silverado.
How PG&E will market the 20% they intend to hold back, and when they might auction it off in the future will be discussed in PG&E's Gas Accord II filing.
No single company will be awarded more than 30% of the capacity on any specific path in the primary open season (though firms can bid whatever level of capacity they choose).
Please forwad along to anyone else who might be interested.
If you have any questions, just holler.
Best,
| More Info: PG&E to Announce Open Season on Redwood and Baja Early Next Week |
Power shortage shifts attitudes Posted at 10:51 p.m. PDT Sunday, May 20, 2001 BY NOAM LEVEY Mercury News Sacramento Bureau California's spiraling energy crisis, already menacing the state's economy and sucking billions of dollars out of the state treasury, has dramatically shaken Californians' confidence in their future and their governor, a new poll shows.
Nearly half of the state's residents now believe California is headed in the wrong direction, a stunning reversal from just five months ago, when nearly two-thirds believed the state was headed in the right direction, according to the poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California.
And bearing the brunt of this new pessimism is Gov.
Gray Davis, whose approval ratings have plummeted to 46 percent, down from 63 percent in January, when the San Francisco-based institute conducted its last poll.
``We have seen slow deteriorations in public attitudes during tough times in the past,'' said Mark Baldassare, who directed the survey.
``But what is most surprising is the speed at which this change has occurred.
.
.
.
It is very dramatic.''
Indeed, the energy crisis now dominates all other issues confronting Californians, according to the survey of 2,001 residents statewide.
Forty-three percent of respondents listed electricity as the most important issue facing the state, compared to just 13 percent who identified growth and 6 percent who identified education as the next most important issues.
In recent years, Californians have consistently ranked education as their top issue.
And nearly two thirds of respondents said they fear the issue of supply, demand and cost of electricity will hurt the California economy ``a great deal.''
``Without electricity we can't do much of anything, especially work, and without work the economy will continue to tank,'' said Maria Griffiths, a 46-year-old juvenile court clerk in San Jose.
Results dismissed The governor's top political adviser, Garry South, dismissed the findings as predictable.
``The voters are in a very bad mood.
They are not happy with anyone in this drama,'' South said.
``But these poll numbers need to be taken in context.
.
.
.
People don't understand what he's done because it is very hard to communicate that in this state.''
South emphasized that he believes Californians will understand the extent of Davis' efforts by the time they go to the polls next year.
Davis is expected to run for re-election next year, and several Republicans, including Secretary of State Bill Jones, are already lining up to challenge him.
Davis also has his eyes on the presidential election in 2004.
The survey found that most Californians do not blame Davis for the current electricity crisis.
Only 10 percent say he and the current Legislature are culpable, compared to 32 percent who blame the utilities and 26 percent who blame former Gov.
Pete Wilson and the legislators who passed California's landmark deregulation five years ago.
``He didn't make the deregulation disaster.
I think that's Pete Wilson's legacy,'' said John Putica, 52, a bank loan officer in San Jose.
Criticism for Davis But there are nonetheless troubling signs for the man charged with leading California out of its power troubles.
Sixty percent of those polled said they disapprove of how Davis is handling the power crisis, much to the delight of Republicans who have hammered the governor for not doing more.
Davis has emphasized that the solution to the state's electricity crisis involves more power plants, more conservation and federal intervention to control the price that California is being forced to pay for power.
The state has approved 15 new power plants since Davis was elected.
But for the past several weeks, the governor has been fighting an escalating war of words with the White House over President Bush's unwillingness to support price caps on electricity.
Bush's energy plan released last week again rejected price controls and focused instead on rapidly boosting the nation's supply of power.
The Public Policy Institute of California's survey found that 43 percent of Californians believe that new power plants offer the best solution to the crisis.
But there is far less support for either conservation or price caps; 18 percent identified conservation as the most important solution, and just 8 percent favored federal price controls on generators.
That news was warmly received by a representative of power generators, who have been accused by Davis and others of artificially inflating the price of power to mine the California market for excessive profits.
``I think the public is skeptical of the actual benefits of trying to cap the price of power,'' said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association.
Electricity generators argue that price caps will discourage the construction of more power plants.
Backing re-regulation Meanwhile, consumer groups, who have been advocating for re-regulation of the electricity market, were left to hope that support for more controls will come when Californians' power bills start rising next month.
``People don't yet understand that generators are responsible for cutting off the juice,'' said Harvey Rosenfield of the Santa Monica-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.
``But in three weeks, California is going to face a catastrophe.
This is going to hit supernova status.
.
.
.
Once people understand what the causes are here, I think they will understand that the only solution will be re-regulation.''
Whether they will trust the state to come up with a solution is unclear, however.
``The electricity problem has not only had major consequences on how people view their leaders and their short-term future,'' said Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California.
``There is less confidence in the state's ability to plan for the long-term future.
And that is giving people worry.
``This crisis and the general economic uncertainty have severely undermined public confidence in California's future and its leaders.''
Mercury News Staff Writer Mike Zapler contributed to this report.
| Power shortage shifts attitudes --Davis Plummets in Polls |
Hertzberg called.
We very briefly discussed the scenarios that he asked us to build for him.
I've attached the file.
the supporting spreadsheets are not included.
If folks would like them, let me know.
Please keep the file confidential.
Hertzberg wanted to see what happened to rates for large (noncore) customers if the small (core) customers' share of past utility debt is shifted to noncore customers.
Our analsis shows that noncore rates approach Loretta's recent rate increases when approximately 50% of core's share of utility past debt is shifted to businesess (i.e., to noncore).
(In fact, Edison's rate in this scenario is below the Lynch rate, while PG&E's is modestly above.)
Increasing the cost shift above the 50% level would start to push rates significantly above the Lynch rates.
Note, however, that in its recent submission to the PUC, DWR's asserts that it's revenue requirement is substantially higher than the revenues support by the Lynch rate increase, suggesting that Lynch will have to increase rates again soon.
In addition, Loretta's rates also do not reflect past utility costs, which will require yet additional increases.
I expect to have another conversation with the Speaker later this evening or tomorrow to discuss the scenarios in more detail (he would still like to put 100% of the IOUs past debts on noncore in exchange for getting a competitive market and out from under Loretta).
I will report back after we've spoken.
All ideas, suggestions, etc.
regarding the attached spreadsheet are welcome and appreciated.
Best,
| Follow-up with Hertzberg on Core/Noncore |
The advocacy ad blitz has started.
I don't know if I have the title correct, but the D.C. based arm of the Democratic National Committee has started an ad campaign against Republicans (in San Diego I believe).
The head of the committee was quoted this morning as saying something to the effect of, "the Republicans in Washington aren't doing anything to solve the problem and "we" want to make sure that they're held accountable."
Best,
| Democratic National Congressional Election Committe Starts Adds in California |
I spoke again briefly with Hertzberg last night and had a lengthy discussion late last night with the guy from CSFB who's been providing Hertzberg with pro bono financial advice on the crisis.
Hertzberg is still hot on putting all of the utility past due on the noncore, though his consultant and I agreed that, politically, the number is more likely to end up somewhere south of 100% (if this thing gets legs).
Hertzberg asked for, and we provided today, a "fifth scenario," which shows how the numbers work out if 100% of core's share of utility past due is shifted to noncore.
It's attached.
Will report back with any further developments.
Note: Please discard the file that I sent you yesterday and replace it with this one.
That file accidentally had the same cents/kwh, noncore rate for both Edison and PG&E.
Edison's rate should be 12.98 cents/kwh NOT 12.21 cents/kwh.
It's the line that reads "Total cost to Noncore under CPUC's Recent Decision."
Best,
| More Follow-up with Hertzberg et. al. |
Good talking to you last nite.
Here's the summary with the 5th scenario.
The Speaker has it.
Give a call if you have any questions.
Best,
| 5th Scenario |
Rosalee: Could you please print out the following two documents for Mr. Lay?
One is an excel sheet showing the summary of the results of our analyis of the core/noncore market structure that Mr. Lay has been discussing with leaders in California.
The other is a word document explaining the summary tables contents.
If you have any questions, just let me know.
Maureen, can you print out for Steve, too?
Thanks very much for your help.
Best,
| Summary of Core/Noncore Analysis |
Greetings: Have you seen this?
Any view on whether there's a group of economists who think otherwise and might be willing to express their views in a response to this letter?
P.S.
Talked to Tyson re: trying to get economists back in the middle of this, but I wasn't altogether successful.
Best,
| Economists letter on FERC and California |
Status of core/noncore proposal Buzz about the proposal in Sacramento is still significant and growing.
Our name is being tossed about, but in the context (apparently) of "some parts of Enron's core/noncore proposal."
Hertzberg is slated to meet with his caucus this evening to discuss the plan.
Conversation with Governor's Financial Advisor Talked to Michael Hoffman today (one of Governor's financial advisors) They've run Hertzberg's version of the core/noncore model (i.e., noncore eats IOU past due) using their MOU numbers.
They said that the model "can work" if noncore can contract for $80/MWH (this is pretty consistent with our analysis).
Hoffman's guys are doing a final scrub on the numbers and Hoffman will fax me the results tomorrow AM.
Hertzberg is coming up with "additional" twists, however.
The twists include increasing the bond issuance to ~$20B (to keep core rates down).
Hoffman and Co. are concerned that the market can't/won't swallow $20B of additional debt (the MOU would issue about $13B).
In addition, Hertzberg wants to stretch it out for 20 years (the MOU would issues 15-year paper)----Hoffman and Co. are concerned that the market won't
| Gov's Financial Advisors Run Core/Noncore Numbers and other news from the day |
I've received a copy of the powerpoint presentation Hertzberg made to the his caucus.
Unfortunately, it's a fax and hardly legible.
I can make out, however, that it is the core/noncore plan.
I'm attempting to get a better copy and will distribute as soon as I get my hands on it.
Please keep confidential that we have a copy.
Thanks.
Best,
| Hertzberg's Plan |
Folks: Here is a rewrite of the power point presentation referenced in the previous note.
Again, please keep confidential and do not distribute.
It's the copy that Hertzberg used to present to his caucus.Thanks.
Best,
| Hertzberg |
I've had several phone calls with large customer groups over the past 24-hours, mostly explaining our noncore/core proposal (in contrast to the one that the Assembly Democrats have launched which would saddle business with 100% of the utilities' past debts).
As folks know, the cost shift provision of the Dems plans have been erroneously attributed to us in some cases.
The business folks have been very appreciative of the discussions and have recognized that, generally, our proposal is a fair and reasonable one.
They are going to try to set up direct negotiations with Hertzberg and have requested that I be part of those negotiations.
They are not sure that Hertzberg will go along with the idea, but they're going to try.
They will get back to me when they find out.
I'll report back soon as I hear something.
| Phone Calls w/Large Customers re: Core/Noncore Proposal |
I think Dennis, Shawne and I were supposed to work more on #2, but since I can't recall, I'm sending to all.
First, I apologize.
I tried to work directly with the excellent spreadsheet Carolyn put together, but I kept fumbling, butchering, etc.
So I canibalized her great stuff and created a new spreadsheet, attempting to incorporate the "clarifications" (yeah, right) that Prof McCullough distributed via email, and the stuff we talked about during break (i.e., timing of cash flows).
The answers are at the bottom of the work sheet.
And I've also included the report (though I did not peruse it for errors, relevancy, etc.).
My biggest concern is question 6.
My answer (despite some outliers) sez that there ain't no loan in June.
(This may mean my spreadsheet's got a fatal flaw--significant probability.)
| Team Project #2---Problem #2 |
FYI.
Rebecca got back in touch wanting to talk about the history of dereg in California.
Been trading messages.
When she gets back to me with what she wants to discuss, I'll check back in before having the conversation.
Question: What about giving her a copy of our high tech slides with the intent of getting her to do a story on it?
She might be a good "carrier."
Thoughts?
One story has already hit the SJ Mercury News.
Best,
| Rebecca Smith |
Mitch: Paul Kaufman mentioned that you'd like to see the testimony that Steve Kean (at a congressional field hearing in San Diego) and I (at a FERC field hearing in San Diego) gave a few weeks ago.
Steve had prepared remarks.
They are attached.
I did not have prepared remarks, but I've attached my talking points.
My talking points were not made public, however, so please keep them private.
Finally, I'm trying to get a transcript of the FERC hearing.
If you would like a copy, please let me know.
And if there's anything else that I can do, please don't hestitate to contact me.
Best,
| FERC Hearing |
BEEP stack is the supply curve for real-time energy that the ISO develops on the basis of bids and offers.
The problem is that the plants the ISO ultimately dispatches from the stack often conflict with the merit order developed from the bids/offers, and the ISO has never been clear about the decision metrics it uses to determine ultimate dispatch.
Everyone, including Belden, thinks it can and ought to be a helluvalot more transparent.
| The ISO's "BEEP" stack |
Susan Scott is a senior attorney with the pipeline group (TW).
I met her as part of the California PUC's gas restructuring case.
For some time she's been inquiring about Government Affairs.
She called me yesterday and mentioned that she's very interested in exploring if there are any opportunities in GA. From my experience, Susan is highly competent and very professional and I think TW would say the same.
She likes her work but wants a new challenge.
I told her I'd inquire about whether someone would be interested in talking with her.
I think that it would be useful for you to chat with her.
Thoughts?
Susan would like to keep it confidential at this point.
| Potential Hire |
FYI.
Great news.
PUC "fixed" the language glitches in the original decision granting ETI its certificate and voted it out yesterday.
So we're good to go on filing our final tariff.
It's attached.
Please take a look and let's discuss ASAP (Monday?)
so we can get if on file at the CPUC.
Best,
| Need to Review California Tariff Pronto |
Rebecca Smith called.
She wants to have coffee on Monday at 10 AM California.
Topics: 1) How California got here.
2) How California can get out of it.
Any chance of talking Monday AM prior to 10 AM California time?
I think I've got the messages pretty well down, but might be useful to touch base.
Let me know.
Hear's a message I'm practicing: "Shapiro and Steffes went to FERC on Friday----problem solved."
| Coffee w/Rebecca |
Greetings.
I'm going to read the material and the case today.
Should we compare notes (via email) on questions 3&4 by tomorrow (Sunday) before lunch?
Let me know.
Best,
| Case |
Please let me know if you want me to participate in any gas panels.
And my feelings won't be hurt if you say no.
Worry not.
Just need to know so that I can prepare some materials.
Best,
| Retreat |
Here's one that's "final," not draft, that just came out.
I'm assuming that this is the one the press is refering to.
Let me know that you think.
| Final report from the Cal PX on the summer prices |
Just spent about 90 minutes with Rebecca.
She left with a very good understanding of our view of the problem and the solutions.
She also spent time asking me how I thought other players would respond to the IOU request for a big check to cover the undercollections.
She expects to have a "big picture" story--covering AB 1890s past, present &
| Coffee with Rebecca Smith |
FYI.
Here's what Dave pulled together on Friday.
I talked to him and told him I was going to make a single power point out of the info and then run it by him for review and comment.
| Jeff Skilling talking points (from Dave Parquet) |
Ms Bennett: Thanks for the voicemail.
Couldn't locate the files you sent in August (uemail now deletes automatically, which may be the problem).
Could you forward a copy to Mr Yang?
Most appreciated.
Best,
| PG&E's Rate Design Update |
Harry: FYI.
First meeting to discuss how to dole out the $50 MM created by AB 970 is 10.7.
Someone I've worked with on DG-type deals in the past from EES is going to attend the meeting (Brian Smith from the Costa Mesa office).
Bob Frank and I had a conference call with him this morning.
URL for the event is included below.
Best,
| Energy Efficiency, etc. Incentives |
Mike: We'd talked about getting together to discuss the bills for the case.
We'd originally agreed to a flat fee of $13, 500 (if memory serves) with a bonus for coming in under the cap.
You've sent me bills (as of August 17 according to my records) for over $25,000.
As you recall, we had a very lengthy discussion regarding the magnitude of the work associated with the hearings and associated briefs.
I stressed that $13.5 was what I'd spend and that we'd have to do the best we could within that constraint, which is why I pressed for a flat fee arrangement at the outset.
With that in mind, I believe that it's important to honor the arrangement.
However, in light of the particular circumstances in this case, I'm willing to exceed the previous arrangement for a total of $15,000, but can't go above that.
If you'd like to discuss it further, I'd be happy to talk about it.
Let me know.
Best,
| Bills for Gas Restructuring Activities |
Given that Peace is likely going to try to push legislation to merge the ISO and PX and other nasty things, likely makes sense to listen in on our message development, tactics in addressing the LMP problem.
You think there'd be any problem with that?
If not, could you pass along the call in number?
Thanks,
| # for Massey Call |
Hi.
Please set up a call for 60 minutes for tomorrow, 10.11.00 for 11 AM CALIFORNIA time and distribute info to the list of folks below.
Thank you very much.
| Discuss Upcoming Sempra Meeting |
Well, it's upon us again and that means X-Mas party.
Joseph and I have begun (barely) to plan for this year's festivities.
But before we get to far along, tried and true democratic (small "d") principles call for a wee bit of polling.
Because we're already in the middle of October we need your responses pronto.
If we don't receive your responses by COB Thursday, then democracy's out the window, and good ol' dictatorship takes over.
Of course, it will be difficult to grant everyone's wishes, but all suggestions will be given great (and equal) weight.
Here are the questions: Would you prefer just dinner, or dinner plus an activity?
Joseph and I are leaning toward dinner and an activity, but wanted to hear from other folks.
If yes, Joseph has come up with a couple of very fun ideas for an activity but suggestions are greatly encouraged and welcome.
Same goes for a restaurant (understanding that the choice of activity may influence where we eat).
Sue has put in her vote for Fleur de Lys.
Should we try to organize the event with the rest of the SF office (i.e., EES and ENA) or confine it to GA?
Should we expand to include Western GA or keep it to SFGA?
We choose for dates the 7th or 8th or 14th or 15th of December.
What's your preference.
Is there a day that just won't work?
Joseph, if I've missed anything, please tack on.
Best,
| That Joyous Time of Year |
Attached is a "plant siting" slide for the next Skilling/Davis meeting.
I developed it from background materials that Dave Parquet pulled together.
This version includes Daves' comments.
His comments are in CAPS.
Best,
| Siting Slide for Davis/SKILLING |
As a follow-up to our call.
Here is some additional information regarding QF pricing issues.
QFs who voluntarily switched to PX pricing have been getting paid full PX prices (and there seem to be a couple of thousand MWs that have switched.
The concern is that the Commission's ultimate decision on PX-based QF prices will force the QFs that have switched to "refund" some of the payments they've received (e.g., under a "PX minus" mechanism).
The majority of QFs are happy with the judge's proposed decision pending before the PUC (except those remotely located QFs who will take a big GMM hit).
As we discussed, the Commission strongly rejected Edison's emergency motion regarding the gas piece of the QF pricing formula.
Recall also that a couple of months ago
| Recent Info on QF Pricing-related Issues |
FYI.
Recently, Chris Calger has asked me to set up a meeting with Sempra.
ENA's seeking deals with the two big CA gas IOUs (PG&E and SoCalGas) that would give ENA access to their assets.
In short, ENA wants to offer a complete outsource deal for the IOUs' core gas load (i.e., rez and small commercial customers).
ENA would take responsibility for providing service for delivery at the city gate and in return would manage all of core's assets (upstream of the city gate).
We're meeting with Sempra's "Chief Regulatory Office" (Bill Reed) and Sempra's CFO next Thursday to discuss.
Given the fact that Sempra's primarily focused on electricity, the plan is to lead off the meeting with a couple of electricity solutions as a bridge to the gas offer.
For electricity, the plan has two pieces: 1) a commodity offer that beats the 6.5 cent cap (i.e., nothing fancy) and 2) "Deal Bench" services with the intent of establishing a procurement mechanism for SDG&E that the California PUC could pre-approve (thereby eliminating some of the immense regulatory risk SDG&E now faces).
Wanted to run this by folks to gauge reactions.
We'll distribute the slides we're putting together as soon as they're drafted--hopefully by COB Friday.
| Meeting w/Sempra |
FYI.
Just got a call from Jan Smutney-Jones.
Apparently, word is on the street that Peace intends to begin targeting Enron as an example of the "misconduct" that Peace alleges has occured in California's markets.
Smutney thinks Peace may be keying off the comments of the "unnamed" trader in the Dow article claiming that Enron's been buying power and holding on to it.
Apparently Peace's other angle is/will be: "The same people who colluded in the design of this market are now colluding to profit unfairly from it."
No idea of when and how Peace might launch any attacks.
Two immediate thoughts: Apart from the bad reporting in the Dow article, that article shows that Enron got beat by, among others, two federal (Canada and the US), one state (SRP) and one municipal (LADWP) government.
David Freeman, who now heads up LADWP, was appointed "Czar" by the State of California and charged with the task of implementing Steve Peace's brain child (AB 1890).
Freeman set up the ISO and PX market structures.
He also set up the Governing Boards.
| Peace Targetting Market Players |
Hi Kim: Any luck withJackie re: getting together to start the project?
And if there's anything else I can do re: your meeting on Monday, don't hesitate.
Leave me a voicemail and let me know how the meeting goes.
I'll be in Vancouver with the EBS gang Monday/Tuesday, and if all goes well maybe I can chat up some folks while I'm there.
Best,
| Finance Project |
Greetings: Well, there's a finance midterm coming up and some of us have discussed getting together the weekend before for a study session.
I just grabbed an old list from last year so apologies if I've included folks who ain't even in finance, or if I've left some folks off.
Sorry to those who received in error, and please forward to anyone else who might be interested.
Anyway, anyone interested?
Hope all is well with all.
Best,
| Study? |
I think it would be a good idea to have Ron Carroll in Watkiss' shop to do a parallel analysis to what we're going to have Mike Day do.
Ron's very good and has done much work on these sortrs of issues.
You comfortable with that?
| Legal Analysis on AB 1890 |
I've been asked for a copy of the transcript from the FERC hearing in S.D.
Any chance of getting that?
And do you folks have a copy of the Peace letter (treatise) sent to FERC last week?
If so, could you fax it to 415.782.7854?
Many thanks.
Best,
| Peace Letter & FERC Transcripts |
Steve: I think I already forward these to you, but if not, they're the prices that Henderson came up with for fully shaped prices to the utilities.
May be useful re: conversations with the Street about getting the utilities out of procurement.
Note that the date on the prices is 10.02.00 so they're somewhat stale, but arguably still indicative.
I'm also going to give you the prices Belden just gave us (prior to the run up yesterday, though) for prices at SP15.
Best,
| Pricing for California utilities |
Here are the very indicative prices Tim gave us for 5 year deals at SP15.
They'll likely change by the time we meet with Sempra on Thursday.
25 MW, on peak (6X16): $53/MWh 25 MW, base load (7X24): $45/MWh 500 MW, on peak (6X16): $55/MWh 500 MW, base load (7X24): $47/MWh
| Belden's prices |
They're still in the formative stage, and the title is korny, but wanted to get the ball rolling.
No pride of authorship.
Feel free to hack away.
Best,
| DRAFT slides for Sempra Meeting |
Attached for your review is a rough cut at slides we're preparing for the meeting with Sempra next Thursday.
Thoughts and comments are appreciated.
Please disregard korny title.
| DRAFT Slides for Sempra Meeting |
Good morning professor: Unfortunately, I'm traveling on business today (it's raing in Vancouver) and can't attend class tonite.
I was wondering if you'd be distributing the take home midterm in this evening's class.
Also, could you resend the access code for the Craftmade case?
I believe that I copied it down incorrectly.
Thank you very much.
Best,
| Midterm |
Knew you'd be dying to know that Barry Staw will be teaching a class on "Creativity" in the Spring.
Be sure to reserve your place today!
Best,
| Great News! |
Hi Mary: When Seab completes the draft of his reader-friendly exec summary, could you make sure that Karen gets a copy to review?
Thanks a million.
Best,
| Summary of Seab's Paper |
Ok.
Here it is.
Quick and dirty.
Make any changes you like.
You're right, if anyone's going to beat St. Louis, it's going to be KC, but I took St. Louis.
| Picks |
Greetings Folks: Any chance of finalizing the California tariff Monday morning (have a call, say, 7:30/8:00 AM PDT)?
Let me know.
Hope all's well with all.
Best,
| California Tariff |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.